|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills how many staff his Department has appointed on secondment since 7 May 2010; and from what organisation each such member of staff has been seconded. 
Mr Redwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills how many employees on temporary contracts (a) his Department, (b) its agencies, (c) its non-Ministerial department and (d) its non-departmental public bodies had on the latest date for which figures are available. 
I have approached the chief executives of the Insolvency Service, Companies House, the National Measurement Office, the Intellectual Property Office and the Skills Funding Agency and they will respond to my hon. Friend directly.
I am replying on behalf of Companies House to your Parliamentary Question tabled 30 June 2010, UIN 5932 to the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills.
As of 7 July, Companies House has eleven employees on temporary contracts.
I am replying on behalf of the Skills Funding Agency to your Parliamentary Question tabled on 30 June 2010 (UIN 5932), to the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, concerning the number of employees on temporary contracts in the Department and its agencies.
As of 1 July 2010, the Skills Funding Agency had four temporary workers.
I am responding in respect of the Intellectual Property Office to your Parliamentary Question tabled 30/06/2010, to the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.
The Intellectual Property Office has 1 person employed on contract that is due to finish on 22 July and will not be extended.
I am responding in respect of the National Measurement Office to your Parliamentary Question tabled on 30 June 2010, to the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills asking how many employees were on temporary contracts on the latest date for which figures are available.
As of today's date, NMO does not have any employees on temporary contracts. We have one vacancy currently being covered by an agency staff worker, who is an employee of that employment agency, not NMO.
The Minister of State, for the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) has asked me to reply to your question how many employees on temporary contracts (a) his Department, (b) its
agencies, (c) its non-Ministerial department and (d) its non-departmental public bodies had on the latest date for which figures are available.
The Insolvency Service currently employs 412 temporary staff.
Mr David Hamilton: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what the running costs of the Employment Agency Standards Inspectorate were in each of the last five years. 
|Financial year||Running costs (£)|
Any estimate of the cost of the jobseeker's guarantee was always subject to review as part of the spending review process to ensure good value for money. The cancellation of the scheme announced on 17 June was therefore not to save money. Rather, funding was never allocated to the jobseeker's guarantee in the first place.
Tessa Munt: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (1) what recent discussions he has had with his European counterparts on the introduction of a requirement for stock exchanges within the EU that all extractive companies listed disclose all payments to foreign Governments; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) what assessment his Department has made of the merits of the introduction of a country-by-country reporting standard of the type proposed by the International Accounting Standards Board (IASB); what recent discussions he has had with the IASB on the matter; and if he will make a statement; 
(3) if his Department will make an assessment of the effect on the UK extractive industry of the provisions of the US Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 2010 on disclosure of payments made to foreign governments; and if he will make a statement. 
The Secretary of State has noted the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act 2010 on disclosure of payments made to foreign governments,
but also notes that both the IASB and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) are both investigating international approaches to this kind of disclosure.
The IASB is an independent standard setter for global accounting standards. The UK Government have not engaged in any discussions about the specific content of accounting standards with IASB. There has been extensive engagement by UK stakeholders directly with the IASB on this issue.
Mr Meacher: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what projects on public attitudes to genetically-modified crops, food and feed have been funded by the (a) Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council, (b) Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, (c) Medical Research Council and (d) Science and Technology Facilities Council since 1997; what the (i) topic, (ii) start date, (iii) cost and (iv) project code was of each such project; who the main contractor was in each case; and which such projects have been completed. 
Mr Willetts: Some of BBSRC's public engagement activities since 1997 have included consideration of GM technologies, some of which (a) explicitly invited public views while others (b) were focused more on communication and raising awareness.
A co-sponsor of 'Future foods' exhibit at the Science Museum from November 1997 to March 1998
Interactive exhibition launched at the 1998 Royal show on GM that provided a focus for people to consider the issues and record their opinions
A display at the 1999 Royal Society Summer Science Exhibition that invited discussion on GM crops and their uses
Public consultation (with NERC) on gene flow in plants and micro-organisms in 2000
In 2000 BBSRC commissioned a short study of attitudes to GM bioremediation that made use of a novel tool, the Ethical Matrix.
In 2001 BBSRC hosted a web-based tool that explored hypothetical novel foods as part of a Foresight Food Chain and Crops Industry Panel initiative
In 2003 BBSRC held a consultation on the future direction of crop science research
The recent synthetic biology dialogue, published in June 2010 covered public views on agri-environmental science as one part of a workshop that explore views around science and technology generically. A later workshop with in the synthetic biology dialogue explored food and crop applications of synthetic biology.
In 1999 BBSRC published two discussion documents on issues surrounding the use of GM in agriculture
In 1999 BBSRC supported an BA and Royal Society of Edinburgh forum that debated GM foods
In 2001 BBSRC supported a public evening meeting that accompanied the EUCARPIA XVI congress in Edinburgh, the meeting covered issues surrounding plant biotechnology
A panel discussion on future renewable bio-energy, including artificial photosynthesis in 2007
BBSRC has also supported its funded researchers through a small grants scheme to engage with the public, some of these grants have been used to discuss issues around GM, for instance: a 1998 discussion meeting on GM with the National Federation of Women's Institutes; a 2003 series of schools debates on 'genetic futures'; and a 2005 public discussion in Plymouth on GM.
None of these Research Councils have funded a separate research project specifically into public attitudes on GM since 1997. However, under the previous Government, the Food Standards Agency was asked by Ministers to carry out a public dialogue project looking at Food - the use of GM. The Government have recently announced that this dialogue will not continue in its current format. The details of the Government's policy on the use of GM technology in food and agriculture are still being determined, but all policies will be based on robust evidence. Developing effective and appropriate public engagement will need to be an element of this.
Rehman Chishti: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills if he will take steps to ensure (a) Greenwich University and (b) other former polytechnics retain university status. 
Mr Evennett: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what estimate he has made of the number of mature students who did not complete a higher education course in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Mr Willetts: Estimates of the number of students who do not complete a higher education course are not available by age group. Non-continuation data, which show the number of entrants not continuing in higher education after their first year, are available by age group and are provided here as an alternative.
In the 2007/08 academic year there were 70,440 UK-domiciled mature entrants (aged 21 and over) to full-time first degree courses at higher education institutions in the UK. Of these entrants 9,875 (14.0%) did not continue in higher education after their first year. In the same academic year there were 31,550 UK-domiciled mature entrants to full-time other undergraduate courses (includes foundation degrees, diplomas and certificates) at higher education institutions in the UK. Of these entrants 4,620 (14.6%) did not continue in higher education after their first year.
Mr Willetts: This Department sponsors the Technology Strategy Board, which operates across all important sectors of the UK economy, ranging from the creative industries to high value manufacturing, but focusing on those opportunities which offer the greatest scope for boosting UK growth and productivity.
The Technology Strategy Board provides funding opportunities (with support from other Government funders) to enable UK-based business and research communities to work together on collaborative R&D projects from which successful new products, processes and services can emerge. Over 900 projects are currently being supported with a combined business and Government investment of over £1 billion (with just over half the funds committed by business).
This Department similarly sponsors the grant for R&D (GRD), which is designed to increase business spend on innovation, including R&D, leading to an increase in the proportion of firms that innovate so that they can increase productivity and profitability. Businesses receiving funding must comply with strict rules on manufacture of products. The company shall not, without prior written consent, manufacture or permit the manufacture of articles incorporating the results of work done with the aid of this grant outside the European economic area for a period starting from the date of the offer letter and ending five years after the date on which final payment is made.
This Department is also considering the recommendations from Sir James Dyson's Report "Ingenious Britain" and will consult with business this autumn. This will include a review of the taxation of intellectual property and the support that R&D tax credits provide for innovation. This Department is similarly considering options for the future delivery of its 'Solutions for Business' portfolio of business support within the forthcoming comprehensive spending review.
Also, UK Trade & Investment (UKTI) does much to help businesses invest and locate in the UK and grow internationally. They do this through impartial advice-information related to funding, financing, staffing and operations; introductions to professional advisers and key contacts; access, through its partnership programmes, to a range of possible business partners and professional service organisations; practical help on the ground, including visits to suitable locations, finding business partners and accessing financial incentives; as well as an aftercare service, including advice on maximising investment in the UK, through domestic and international expansion.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills how many insolvency investigators were employed by the Insolvency Service
in (a) 2008, (b) 2009 and (c) 2010; and whether he expects any such investigators to be made redundant as a result of his Department's planned spending reductions. 
Mr Davey: The Insolvency Service employs insolvency examiners who, among their various duties, investigate the causes of failure in bankruptcy and compulsory company liquidation cases. In addition, The Insolvency Service employs staff within its Investigation and Enforcement Services (IES) Directorate whose job it is to consider reports received from licensed insolvency practitioners in respect of the conduct of directors of companies in non-compulsory insolvency procedures and complaints about live companies and to investigate and take action where it is appropriate in the public interest.
Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills pursuant to the answer of 6 September 2010, Official Report, column 371W, on internet regulation, if he will bring forward legislative proposals to require internet providers to divulge the contact details of persons who leave derogatory or insulting comments about others on internet sites; what recent representations he has received on this issue; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Vaizey: The Government are not proposing to bring forward legislative proposals that would require internet service providers (ISPs) to reveal the contact details of persons who might have left derogatory or insulting remarks about others on internet sites.
Jack Dromey: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what his most recent estimate is of the set up costs associated with implementing the Government's proposals for local enterprise partnerships. 
Mr Prisk: In total the Government received 59 outline proposals for local enterprise partnerships in response to the joint letter from my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills and my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, dated 29 June. Proposals have been developed at local levels by partnerships of local authorities, businesses and other relevant bodies.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what resources his Department provided to assist Lord Sugar in his role as Government Enterprise Champion; and how many days Lord Sugar spent on official duties in this role. 
Mr Prisk: The Department did not provide resources to Lord Sugar. The position of Government Enterprise Champion was unpaid and Lord Sugar neither claimed nor received any expenses. Support for his work was provided by civil servants, primarily those responsible for enterprise, as part of their normal day-to-day responsibilities. His time in the role was spent working in the Department, on visits, meeting businesses and working remotely. He was in continuous, near daily, communication throughout the period of his appointment.
Jack Dromey: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (1) what the cost to the public purse was of the free helpline provided by his Department's Manufacturing Advisory Service in the latest period for which figures are available; 
(3) how much the Manufacturing Advisory Service spent on subsidised consultancy support for small and medium-sized enterprises in (a) 2007-08, (b) 2008-09 and (c) 2009-10; and how many businesses used that support service in each such year. 
Mr Prisk: The helpline for the Manufacturing Advisory Service is part of the wider inquiry service which includes e-mail inquiries and phone calls. These range from straightforward questions dealt with in a few minutes to more significant issues that require small pieces of research to support the manufacturer.
|Number of businesses using inquiry service|
|(1) Includes website.|
|Number of subsidised consultancy projects||Total cost (£)||Client contribution (£)||Cost to MAS (£)|
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills if he will make it his policy to implement country-by-country reporting for multi-national companies based in the UK. 
Mr Davey: The Government will consider action when they see the outcomes from the international work currently under way by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development and the International Accounting Standards Board. The Government support this work and await the outcome with interest.
Mr Evennett: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills how many students resident in the London Borough of Bexley are registered as international students for tuition fee purposes due to their immigration status. 
Laura Sandys: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills if he will review the processes of the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education in order to reduce the burden of administration for academics and university departments, whilst ensuring the effectiveness of those processes. 
Mr Willetts: Significant work is under way across the higher education sector to strengthen future quality assurance arrangements. The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) launched on 1 October a consultation on a new method for reviewing higher education institutions in England and Northern Ireland from September 2011. The proposed new process is intended to encourage constant improvement in the quality of UK higher education while being proportionate in its demand on resources in institutions. The detail of this work is rightly led by the sector but the Government have a legitimate interest, particularly in respect of ensuring value for money for all public spending, and is keeping in close touch with the QAA and others across the sector on this agenda.
Mr Iain Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills whether his Department plans to bring forward primary legislation to (a) abolish regional development agencies and (b) establish local economic partnerships. 
Mr Prisk: Primary legislation will be required to abolish regional development agencies. Local enterprise partnerships will differ across the country in order to best meet local circumstances and opportunities. The Government are considering whether it will be necessary to introduce legislation to create local enterprise partnerships.
The Government published a consultation paper on 23 July seeking views on the design of the fund. The paper set out the objectives of the Regional
Growth Fund, put forward proposals on the fund's design to meet those objectives and posed questions on aspects of the fund where Government sought input, including the bidding process.
The consultation closed on 6 September and consideration is now being given to the detail of the operation of the Growth Fund. This will then be set out in the White Paper on sub-national growth, due to be published in the autumn.
Tom Blenkinsop: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what consultation he has undertaken with local authorities on the bidding process for the Regional Growth Fund. 
By the time the consultation closed on 6 September, around 340 responses had been received in total. Over 100 of these were from local authorities, bodies that represent groups of local authorities, existing multi-area agreement partnerships and prospective local enterprise partnerships that include local authorities.
Mr Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills whether the methodology his Department will employ in allocating monies from the Regional Growth Fund will take into account economic and social inequalities within regions; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Prisk: The Government published a consultation on the Regional Growth Fund, seeking views on how the fund should be designed. The consultation closed on 6 September and the responses received are now being considered with a view to publishing further information on the design and implementation of the Regional Growth Fund as part of the White Paper on sub-national growth, expected later in the autumn.
Mr Gyimah: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what research and development grants his Department provides to innovative small businesses; and what arrangements his Department plans to make for access to such grants after the ending of the South East of England Development Agency. 
Mr Willetts: The Government's current 'Solutions for Business' portfolio of business support products includes the Grant for Research and Development, which provides grants of up to £500,000 to support businesses in developing new technological products and processes, and Innovation Vouchers, which range from £3,000 to £10,000 and can be used by small businesses to support their collaboration with research institutions.
Mr Willetts: The coalition agreement makes it clear that we are committed to working with universities, research councils and business to enhance the effectiveness of the innovation system to support successful UK innovation. We are considering the recommendations from Sir James Dyson's Report 'Ingenious Britain' including refocusing the R&D Tax Credit on high tech, small firms and start ups and will consult with business in the autumn.
The Research Councils, Universities and the Technology Strategy Board support research and development activity across all the important sectors of the UK and with those that offer the greatest scope for boosting UK growth and productivity.
Jack Dromey: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what estimate he has made of the monetary value of Government funding allocated to scientific research projects undertaken at each institution in each Research Assessment Exercise category in each region in 2009-10. 
Mr Willetts: Quality-related research funding from the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) is awarded formulaically to English institutions on the basis of the 2008 Research Assessment Exercise (RAE). This funding also provides incentives for working with businesses and charities, and for supervising young researchers. Full details of HEFCE's research grant funding to individual English institutions for 2009-10 and 2010-11 can be found at:
The Higher Education Statistics Authority (HESA) publishes data annually on the research income received by individual higher education institutions from the Funding Councils, Research Councils and from a range of other public and private sources. The latest available data are for 2008-09:
Mark Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills (1) if his Department will take steps to (a) simplify and (b) standardise the current system to compensate businesses for the impact of local utilities work; 
(2) if his Department will consider the merits of altering the current compensation payment available to businesses payable as a result of the impact of local utilities work, so that utilities companies are required to take into account seasonal business trends as well as general business trends. 
The Department for Transport has received no recent representations proposing changes to existing compensation arrangements, and has no current plans to review or reform them. We are however reviewing the operation of street works with a view to lessening their duration, consistent with safety, and hence their impact on road works.
Tom Blenkinsop: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what environmental impact assessments have been undertaken for the proposed Royal Mail sorting office reorganisation, with particular reference to its likely effects on (a) vehicle mileage travelled by employees during working hours, (b) mileage travelled by employees on their journeys to and from work and (c) the outsourcing of downstream contracts. 
Mr Davey: The Royal Mail always considers the environmental impacts of any operational changes it plans to make before reaching a final decision and takes responsibility for reducing its impact on the environment and preparing for environmental changes in the future. This includes working with its people, customers and suppliers in doing the same.
The issue the hon. Member has raised is an operational matter for the company's senior management team. I have therefore asked the chief executive of Royal Mail, Moya Greene, to respond directly to him and a copy of the reply will be placed in the House Libraries.
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what plans he has for
the future of Royal Mail's universal service obligation; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Davey: The coalition Government are committed to the universal postal service and this will be at the heart of the legislation we are bringing forward shortly. Our firm intention is to maintain the universal service at its current levels, and the same price, same service everywhere principle will remain. We will not allow a situation where the level of the universal service for Inverness is not the same as that received in Bolton or London.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what meetings Ministers in his Department and its predecessors had with representatives of trade unions in each month since May 1997; which unions Ministers met; what discussions took place on each occasion; and if he will make a statement. 
|Minister||Date||Meeting with||Purpose of meeting|
This information will be published on the BIS public website in accordance with Cabinet Office instruction. Details of meetings with external organisations have been published on the BIS public website since October 2009 and continue to be published quarterly. All information prior to this date could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Harriett Baldwin: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what the cost to the public purse was of travel using private planes by UK international trade representatives in (a) 2008-09 and (b) 2009-10. 
Mr Alan Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans she has to implement the age verification proposals contained in the 2010 mandatory code for alcohol retailers. 
Karl McCartney: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what consideration she has given to the merits of establishing a minimum price per alcohol unit for the retail sale of alcohol. 
James Brokenshire: The Government are currently conducting a review of alcohol taxation and pricing, which is being jointly led by the Home Office and HM Treasury. The review is expected to conclude in late autumn, and we are unable to pre-empt the results of this review.
Alan Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions she has had with Ministerial colleagues on the implications of competition law for a policy to set a minimum price for a unit of alcohol. 
James Brokenshire: The Government are currently conducting a review of alcohol taxation and pricing, which is being jointly led by the Home Office and HM Treasury. The review is expected to conclude in late autumn.
Alan Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if she will bring forward proposals for a national guarantee for (a) swift police force responses to complaints of antisocial behaviour and (b) stronger enforcement of antisocial behaviour orders. 
Alan Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department with reference to her speech at the Coin Street Community Centre on 28 July 2010, what the evidential basis was for her statement that young people regard an antisocial behaviour order as a badge of honour. 
"ASBOs functioned as a 'badge of honour', rather than addressing the causes of the behaviour".
Alan Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what discussions she has had with police officers and professional bodies on the impact that antisocial behaviour orders have had on anti-social behaviour since their introduction. 
Mrs May [holding answer 9 September 2010]: Home Office officials are in constant dialogue with police and other professional bodies about a wide range of issues related to antisocial behaviour, including the effectiveness of tools and powers such as the antisocial behaviour order.
Mr Burley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many antisocial behaviour orders were (a) issued and (b) breached in Cannock Chase constituency in each of the last three years. 
Nick Herbert: The latest available data on the number of antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs) issued and breached covers the period 1 April 1999 to 31 December 2008. Data collected centrally by the Ministry of Justice on the number of ASBOs issued and breached are not available below Criminal Justice System (CJS) area level.
Tracey Crouch: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many antisocial behaviour orders have been (a) granted and (b) breached in Kent and Medway in each of the last five years. 
Nick Herbert: The number of antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs) issued in the Kent Criminal Justice System (CJS) area and the number proved in court to have been breached in the Kent CJS area, in each year between 2004 and 2008 (latest currently available), are shown in the table.
|The number of antisocial behaviour orders (ASBOs) issued all courts( 1 ) and the number proved in court to have been breached( 2) in the Kent Criminal Justice System (CJS) area, 1 January 2004 to 31 December 2008|
|(1) Includes ASBOs issued on application by magistrates courts acting in their civil capacity and county courts, which became available on 1 April 1999 and ASBOs made following conviction for a relevant criminal offence at the Crown court and at magistrates courts (acting in their criminal capacity), which became available on 2 December 2002. Prior to the creation of the Ministry of Justice on 9 May 2007, numbers of ASBOs issued were reported to Home Office by the Court Service. (2) Breach data from the magistrates court administrative systems in Kent are known to have been under-reported. ASBOs may be breached more than once and in more than one year. In this table ASBOs are counted once only within the period when they were first breached. Many of these breaches will be as a result of an ASBO that was issued in an earlier year. ASBOs may be issued in one area and breached in another. For these reasons breach rates cannot be computed from the figures presented in this table. Breaches are counted in this table by area of issue. Note: Every effort is made to ensure that the figures presented are accurate and complete. However, it is important to note that these data have been extracted from large administrative data systems generated by the courts and police forces. As a consequence, care should be taken to ensure data collection processes and their inevitable limitations are taken into account when those data are used.|
Source: Justice Statistics Analytical Services within the Ministry of Justice.
Damian Green: The accompanying table shows the number of asylum applications received in the United Kingdom by principal applicants, by country of nationality in the last five years. The figures for 2009 are provisional.
Information on asylum is published annually and quarterly. Annual figures on principal asylum applications, by nationality, for the years 2000-09 are available in Table 2a of the supplementary tables that accompany the Control of Immigration: Statistics United Kingdom, 2009 bulletin. Latest quarterly figures on principal applications are also available in Table 2a for Quarter two 2010 that accompany the Control of Immigration: Quarterly Statistical Summary, April to June 2010.
|Applications( 1) received for asylum in the United Kingdom, excluding dependants, by country of nationality, 2000-09|
|Number of principal applicants|
|Country of nationality||2005||2006||2007||2008||2009( 2)|
|n/a = Not applicable|
(1) Figures rounded to the nearest 5 (- = 0, *= 1 or 2) and may not sum to the totals shown because of independent rounding.
(2 )Provisional figures
(3) Serbia (inc. Kosovo) and Montenegro counted under "Other Europe" from 2007.
(4) EU Accession States: Bulgaria, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia. Figures in 2000 exclude Malta but include Cyprus (Northern part of).
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 6 September 2010, Official Report, column 35W, on asylum: deportation, how much the UK Border Agency has spent on cancellation fees in respect of (a) scheduled and (b) chartered flights in the last 12 months. 
Damian Green: The amount spent on cancellation fees for removals using scheduled flights from the United Kingdom (UK) in the last 12 months (commencing from l September 2009 until 31 August 2010) is not readily available. Since May our service providers have been contractually obliged to produce management information on cancellation costs. As such we are able to provide costs from May 10 to August 10 (see table). However to calculate the amount spent on cancellation fees for removals from the United Kingdom using scheduled flights prior to May 10 would require detailed analysis of management information captured and this could be done only at disproportionate cost.
|Departures in month||Cancellation costs (£)|
| Note: All figures given are internal management information and subject to change. They have not yet been fully accounted or reconciled.|
Greg Mulholland: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many failed asylum seekers have been evicted from their homes in Leeds North West constituency before being deported from the UK in the last 12 months. 
Nick Herbert: Future funding for community safety work will be decided as part of the Government's spending review, which will be published on 20 October 2010. We cannot speculate on the outcome of that review before it is finalised, except to be clear that the Government's priority is to cut the deficit and get the economy moving again.
In the consultation document 'Policing in the 21st Century: Reconnecting Police and the People', the Government announced that they were considering giving police and crime commissioners a role in commissioning community safety work. This will also be subject to the outcome of the spending review, as well as the consultation.
Karen Lumley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans she has for the future of community safety partnerships (CSPs); and what recent assessment she has made of the value for money of CSPs. 
Nick Herbert: Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) and other local partnerships have played a strong role in preventing crime and we want them to continue to do so. In order to free local partners from central bureaucracy we are considering whether we can repeal some of the more prescriptive elements of CSP regulations. In addition, the new Police and Crime Commissioners will be enabled to play a considerable role in relation to community safety, and the Government are currently consulting publicly on how Commissioners can best work with criminal justice and community safety partners.
We have recently considered the available international evidence of the effectiveness of partnership working in a crime and disorder context and concluded that it supports the general principle that collaborative working between partners is more effective in reducing and preventing crime than agencies working alone; there is also some evidence that working in partnership has the potential to create efficiency savings by reducing duplication and fragmentation of services.
Mr Blunkett: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the statement of 13 July 2010, Official Report, columns 797-98, on counter-terrorism and security powers, when she expects to announce the membership of the team conducting her Department's review of counter-terrorism and security powers. 
Nick Herbert: As set out in the Terms of Reference for the review, which were placed in both House Libraries on 23 July 2010, the review is being conducted by the Office of Security and Counter-Terrorism in the Home Office with the full involvement of the police, the security and intelligence agencies, the Crown Prosecution Service and other Government Departments including those in Scotland and Northern Ireland. Independent oversight of the review will be provided by Lord Macdonald of River Glaven who will ensure that the review is properly conducted, that all the relevant options have been considered and that the recommendations of the review are fair and balanced.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what steps she plans to take to ensure the proportionate use by public authorities of powers available to them under anti-terrorism legislation. 
My right hon. Friend the Home Secretary announced a review of counter terrorism and security powers and measures on 13 July 2010, Official Report, columns 797-809. The purpose of the review is to look at the balance between security and civil liberties in relation to the most sensitive and controversial powers and, consistent with protecting the public and where possible, to reduce the powers assumed by the state.
Nick Herbert [holding answer 13 September 2010]: The recent trends in official crime statistics will not form part of the review. It will consider the coverage, publication and governance of all Home Office crime statistics including the British Crime Survey.
Graham Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether the requirements under the Crime and Disorder (Overview and Scrutiny) Regulations 2009 for the designated scrutiny committees to meet with responsible authorities in connection with the discharge of their crime and disorder functions at least once a year will apply to GP consortia. 
Nick Herbert: Primary care trusts (PCTs) are currently one of the six responsible authorities which comprise Community Safety Partnerships; collectively the partners have a statutory duty to develop and implement strategies to reduce crime and disorder, and to reduce reoffending. The work of Community Safety Partnerships is subject to formal scrutiny under provisions in the Police and Justice Act 2006 (supplemented by the Crime and Disorder (Overview and Scrutiny) Regulations 2009). The NHS White paper 'Equity and excellence: Liberating the NHS', which was published in July 2010, announced the abolition of PCTs and the creation of GP consortia and other new arrangements. The legislation governing CSPs will be updated in accordance with any changes that take place.
Alan Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what discussions she has had with (a) police forces and (b) professional bodies on her plans to encourage active citizens to become community crime fighters; 
(2) pursuant to chapter 5 of her Department's consultation on policing in the 21st century, what plans she has to encourage active citizens to become community crime fighters; and what estimate she has made of the cost of implementing such proposals, with particular reference to the cost of (a) mobilising activists, (b) training, (c) information, (d) publicity and (e) support. 
Mrs May: The Government want to support the public to take a more active role in keeping neighbourhoods safe by working in partnership with the police. We have published a consultation document, "Policing in the 21st Century", setting out proposed national changes to policing. These include encouraging citizens to play their part through joint patrols with the police, looking out for their neighbours and passing on safety tips as part of Neighbourhood Watch groups or as community crime fighters. Officials have had discussions with police partners, community crime fighters and others to develop these ideas.
Ms Buck: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many crimes involving (a) knives and (b) firearms were recorded in each postcode area in each London local authority in 2009-10. 
Mr Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent estimate she has made of the average time taken for an organisation to obtain the results of Criminal Record Bureau checks; what steps she plans to take to reduce the time taken to undertake such checks; and if she will make a statement. 
Lynne Featherstone [holding answer 16 September 2010]: The Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) was established under Part V of the Police Act 1997 and was launched in 2002. The service provided by the CRB enables organisations across England and Wales in the public, private and voluntary sectors to make safer recruitment decisions by identifying candidates who may be unsuitable for certain work, especially roles that involve working with children and vulnerable adults.
The performance of the CRB is measured against a number of Published Service Standards (PSS) which include to issue 95% of Standard CRB checks within 10 days and 90% of Enhanced CRB checks within 28 days.
In the last period for which figures are available, August 2010, the number of days the CRB took on average to complete an Enhanced check is 27.7. This figure includes the data for Enhanced applications handled by the CRB where the data provided on the application form are complete and there is no requirement to write to the registered body for clarification of information.
The average length of time taken to process a Standard certificate is unavailable as the data are not collated by the bureau. Standard applications represent only 4% of all applications received and the CRB are currently exceeding their PSS in relation to these checks, issuing 99.8% in 10 days.
At present the CRB is issuing 88.2% of Enhanced certificates within the 28-day PSS. There can, however, be a number of factors that can affect the timely completion of CRB checks, including but not restricted to:
the length of time it can take for an employer to deal with and submit the initial application;
the accurate completion of the application form;
the clarity of the information provided, and
the existence of conviction or non-conviction information and the operational effectiveness of the disclosure units of the police forces involved in the CRB checking process.
working with police forces on issues such as recruitment needs and lead-in times, retention of staff, IT systems and capacity, accommodation constraints and local force vacancies;
where police forces get into difficulty the CRB support them in developing recovery plans to reduce the build up of work, and
proactively manage and report performance on a weekly basis across all police forces
Damian Green: The Government are committed to ending the detention of children for immigration purposes. I am having ongoing discussions with the UK Border Agency about how this can be achieved in a way which promotes the welfare of children while ensuring the return of families who have no right to be in the UK. Significant progress has been made and we are now piloting new approaches that involve options based on keeping families with children in the community. We are also continuing to work on alternative ways of securing the removal of those families who refuse to comply with our new approach.
Mr Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which former (a) buildings and (b) land owned by (i) her Department and (ii) (A) non-departmental public bodies and (B) agencies for which her Department is responsible have been sold since May 2005; what the sale price of each was at the time of sale; and to which body the funds from the sale accrued in each case. 
The Home Secretary's official residence at 62 South Eaton Place London SW1 was sold at close to the asking price of £4.0 million. The exact price is subject to a confidentiality agreement requested by the purchaser. In addition, two sites were transferred to the Ministry of Justice for potential prison use. Current values of the sites sold are not known. Receipts were retained by my Department.
Mike Freer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average cost to her Department was of processing the payment of an invoice in the latest period for which figures are available; and what proportion of invoices settled in that period her Department paid (a) electronically and (b) by cheque. 
The average cost for 2009-10 (the latest full year figures available) was £6.98 per invoice. This was the cost of the Shared Service Centre teams directly involved with processing the invoice and their share of the overheads.
Using Buying Solution frameworks, the Department competes each requirement. The competition and any negotiation ensure that value for money is achieved. It does not therefore agree daily rates. The Department has maintained significant focus in this area in the financial years 2009-10 and 2010-11, which has resulted in spend in this category reducing by 33% in Q1 this financial year 2010-11, compared to the same period in the last financial year.
Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the monetary value is of contracts her Department has awarded to each (a) management consultancy and (b) IT company since 7 May 2010. 
|Supplier||Contract value (£)|
Stewart Hosie: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many transport-related fines her Department has settled on behalf of its staff in each year since 2005; and what the cost to the public purse was in each such year. 
Matthew Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many chairs her Department has purchased in each year since 1997; how much it spent in each such year; and what the five most expensive chairs purchased in each such year were. 
The majority of the most expensive chairs were acquired following occupational health assessments recommending the provision of orthopaedic chairs to meet users' specific needs. This enables the Department to meet its duty of care to its staff and to comply with the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.
Graham Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much was spent under each budgetary heading by (a) her Department and (b) the UK Border Agency on hospitality in 2005-06. 
Nick Herbert: Home Office expenditure on official hospitality and entertainment conforms to departmental guidance on financial procedures and propriety, which complies with the principles of Managing Public Money and HM Treasury's Regularity and Propriety handbook.
However, the Home Office spent £323,983 in 2005-06, of which £67,788 was incurred by the Immigration and Nationality Directorate, that part of the Department whose roles and responsibilities were assumed by UK Border Agency.
Mike Freer: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much her Department spent on newspapers, periodicals and trade profession magazines in each year since 1997.  [Official Report, 28 October 2010, Vol. 517, c. 7MC.]
This year we have been able to access more information that has enabled us to provide more details than we did in answering a similar question answered on 31 March 2010, Official Report, columns 1075-76W.
This framework agreement includes figures for the UK Border Agency and it is not possible to separate out their expenditure from this figure. The other Executive agencies do not yet use this framework and so are not included.
The figures provided reflect the functions with the Home Office during the listed years. Machinery of government changes and internal departmental restructuring has led to changes in the size and functions of the Department. As a consequence direct comparison year on year is very difficult.
|Expenditure on newspapers and journals for period 1999-2010|
Mr Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much was paid by her Department in rent for properties in (a) total and (b) each (i) region and (ii) nation of the UK in each of the last five years. 
Nick Herbert: The Department's centrally controlled rent payments (rounded) for the last five years excluding agencies and PFI contracts, and split across London, Scotland and regions where properties are rented, were as follows:
|Total||London||North West||South West||East Midlands||East of England||West Midlands||Scotland|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|