|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will estimate the average length of a call, including the time spent on hold, to his Department's 0800 2888 777 number for contacting ATOS in relation to work capability assessments. 
Chris Grayling: Atos Healthcare has confirmed that the current average call length including hold is two minutes 49 seconds. The timing is within agreed contract standard but work is ongoing to help Atos improve upon this.
Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the average amount paid to approved healthcare professionals for carrying out the medical services element of the work capability assessment. 
Chris Grayling: Information relating to the payments paid to approved health care professionals for delivery of the medical services element of the work capability assessment is commercially sensitive and release of the information would prejudice the interests of Atos Healthcare and the Department's future dealings with Atos Healthcare or other service providers.
Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions with reference to his Department's document ESA214 - The Work Capability Assessment, page 17, what estimate he has made of the average time which elapses between a customer's initial work capability assessment and a further assessment; and how many customers have been required to undergo more than one work capability assessment since its introduction. 
Chris Grayling: Employment and support allowance (ESA) was introduced in October 2008. A key factor in determining eligibility for ESA is the work capability assessment (WCA). The WCA is carried out by health care professionals employed by Atos Healthcare.
The average time between the initial WCA and the first repeat WCA is just under 10 months. This is based on data from 66,300 ESA claims, starting between October 2008 and May 2010. These only include people who have had two or more completed WCAs relating to the same ESA claim.
Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions with reference to page 6 of ESA214-The Work Capability Assessment, how many healthcare professionals provisionally approved at stage 3 have subsequently been removed from the training process. 
Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions with reference to page 6 of ESA214-The Work Capability Assessment, by what criteria the satisfactory standard for the purpose of the stage 2 written assessment of medical knowledge is determined. 
Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions with reference to page 6 of ESA214-The Work Capability Assessment, what criteria are used to determine whether an approved healthcare professional continues to satisfy the required quality standards. 
Chris Grayling: Atos Healthcare has an audit programme for all health care professionals developed in conjunction with and monitored by the DWP. This consists of a nationally statistically significant programme of random audit supported by a rolling programme of individual audit and where appropriate, individual targeted audit. In addition, the number of cases that are returned by decision makers for rework are monitored for each individual health care professional.
Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions with reference to his Department's document ESA214-The Work Capability Assessment, page 15, what medical training is provided to a decision maker to allow him or her to consider any evidence of a significant change in the customer's medical condition in the light of the ending of the requirement for the customer's doctor to issue any further medical certificates following the completion of a work capability assessment. 
The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question, with reference to his Department's document ESA214-The Work Capability Assessment page 15, what medical training is provided to a decision maker to allow him or her to consider any evidence of a significant change in the customer's medical condition in the light of the ending of the requirement for the customer's doctor to issue any further medical certificates following the completion of a work capability assessment. This is something that falls within the responsibilities delegated to me as Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus.
Decision makers do not receive formal medical training. The role of a decision maker is to apply the law, on the balance of probabilities, based on the available evidence. Where evidence of a change in the customer's medical condition is received, the decision maker must consider whether this change could lead to a change in the award of ESA. Where the nature of the change means that the effect on the award is not clear, advice can be sought from Health Care Professionals employed by ATOS Healthcare. These Health Care Professionals provide decision makers with expert advice on medical questions. Decision makers are provided with detailed guidance on the nature of the advice that can be provided and when and how to seek such advice.
Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions with reference to page 6 of ESA214-The Work Capability Assessment, how many approved healthcare professionals were withdrawn from the work capability assessment process for failing to continue to satisfy the required quality standards in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions with reference to his Department's document ESA214-The Work Capability Assessment, page 5, what estimate he has made of the average length of time an approved healthcare professional spends completing stage 1-The prescribed training course. 
1. Pre-course reading-the time taken is dependent on the individual healthcare professional
2. A programme of face to face trainer led training which takes:
6 days for new entrant doctors
15 days for new entrant nurses
20 days for new entrant physiotherapists.
Stephen Lloyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what representations he has received on his Department's review of the work capability assessment published in March 2010 from (a) the Social Security Advisory Committee, (b) charities and (c) other organisations; what the content was of such representations; what plans he has to implement the findings of the review; and what the relationship is between such plans and his plans for implementation of the findings of the Harrington Review. 
Chris Grayling: The Department-led Review of the Work Capability Assessment (WCA) was published on 29 March 2010. It proposed a number of changes to the WCA, including expanding the Support Group for claimants with severe disability due to a mental health condition and making greater provision for individuals awaiting or between courses of chemotherapy.
Following discussions with the Department, the Social Security Advisory Committee consulted with a wide range of disability organisations on the changes and issued a report on 14 October 2010. The Department has considered the Committee's report and will publish its response shortly.
The Department-led Review is part of an ongoing process of improvement to the WCA. Taken together with the improvements we are making following Professor Harrington's Independent Review these changes represent important and ongoing progress in creating a fairer and more accurate assessment.
Jon Cruddas: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will postpone the introduction of the new work capability assessment to enable arrangements to take full account of the recommendations of Professor Malcolm Harrington's review that he has accepted. 
Chris Grayling: We believe that the principles of the work capability assessment (WCA) are right, but that the system which we inherited contained some flaws that risked undermining its effectiveness. We have therefore moved swiftly to put those right.
We welcome the first independent review of the WCA, led by Professor Malcolm Harrington. This is a thorough review that has reviewed a substantial amount of evidence. As a result, Professor Harrington has come forward with a wide range of far reaching and challenging proposals which the Government fully support.
We are committed to taking forward the review's recommendations so that we can make the system fairer and more effective. The Government response to Professor Harrington's review sets out how and when we will implement the recommendations of the review, almost all of which will be in place in time for the national roll-out of the incapacity benefits reassessment programme.
Natascha Engel: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people whose work capability assessment initially found them fit for work had their assessments overturned upon appeal and were found unfit for work in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Chris Grayling: The medical services agreement between Atos Healthcare and the Department for Work and Pensions does not include any provisions either from the Department or from Atos Healthcare to incentivise health care professionals to find claimants undergoing the WCA fit for work, and nor would we wish to do so.
It should be noted, however that all decisions on benefit entitlement are made by DWP decision makers and not by Atos Healthcare professionals. Entitlement is determined by the Department's decision makers and is based on all available evidence, including that provided by the claimant. Decision makers are rightly impartial and also not incentivised to find claimants under going the WCA fit for work.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate she has made of the number of persons who have been in the UK in breach of immigration controls for a period exceeding (a) one year, (b) two years, (c) three years, (d) four years, (e) five years, (f) six years, (g) seven years, (h) eight years, (i) nine years and (j) 10 years. 
Damian Green: It is not possible to accurately quantify the number of people currently in the UK in breach of immigration controls, as some deliberately evade immigration control in order to remain in the country illegally.
Illegal immigration puts huge pressure on the public purse at a time when the country can least afford it. Together with the police and the Serious Organised Crime Agency the UK Border Agency will continue to make life as difficult as possible for those who cheat the immigration system.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many immigrants who have entered the UK illegally claimed asylum following detection in each year for which figures are available; how many of those were granted asylum; how many of those were refused permission to remain in the UK and asked to leave the UK; and how many left the UK in each year. 
|(1) Data are for individuals served papers as immigration offenders, who subsequently claimed asylum in 2008, 2009, and 2010.|
(2) Data relates to the main applicants only.
(3) Data relates to the number granted asylum (including Humanitarian Protection and Discretionary Leave) at first decision.
(4) Data relates to the number refused asylum at first decision.
(5) Data relates to Other outcomes (e.g. as yet unconcluded cases, withdrawn by applicant, withdrawn absconder, applicant deceased, applicant left UK, Third Country action accepted.)
1. All figures quoted are internal management information only and are subject to change.
2. This information has not been quality assured under National Statistics protocols.
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many deaths from carbon monoxide poisoning in domestic premises of each type of tenure there were per 100,000 households in each of the last 15 years. 
As Director General for the Office for National Statistics, I have been asked to reply to your recent question asking:
How many deaths from carbon monoxide poisoning in domestic premises of each type of tenure there were per 100,000 households in each of the last 15 years. (38594)
The table provides the number of deaths where the toxic effect of carbon monoxide was the cause of death by local authority (Table 2), for England and Wales, from 1995 to 2009 (the latest year available). A copy of Table 2 has been placed in the House of Commons library.
Mortality statistics are produced from information recorded at death registration. Although the place of usual residence of the deceased and the place of death are recorded, tenancy arrangements are not, so it is not possible to provide figures by domestic premises of each type of tenure.
Damian Green: The Home Office publishes statistics on the number of persons removed or departed voluntarily from the UK on a quarterly and annual basis, which are available from the Library of the House and the Home Office's Research, Development and Statistics website at:
Mr Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department pursuant to the answer of 26 January 2011, Official Report, column 344W, on Bolivia: drugs, whether the Bolivian Government's amendment to the 1961 UN Single Convention on Narcotic Drugs sought to remove the ban on coca leaf chewing rather than to remove coca leaf as an illicit drug. 
James Brokenshire [holding answer 7 February 2011]: The Government believe that to remove the ban on coca leaf chewing would legitimise coca production and, therefore, its effect would be to remove coca leaf as an illicit drug.
Mr Ruffley: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the Jtrack programme in tracking offenders; and if she will make a statement. 
James Brokenshire: JTrack is a national web-based IT system to enable all 43 police forces in England and Wales and local partner agencies to monitor, track and review their locally identified prolific and other priority offenders across the Criminal Justice System.
The system is funded centrally by the Home Office and is managed by the National Police Improvement Agency (NPIA). We are also working with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) to ensure that the system continues to meet local needs particularly in the context of the development of local Integrated Offender Management (IOM) approaches.
The integrity, confidentiality and availability of JTrack has been fully tested through an accredited IT healthcheck. There has been no national assessment of the effectiveness of the system in tracking offenders as data are managed locally.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many vehicles screened by port operators or authorities in other EU member states were later found in the UK to have been used to transport illegal immigrants into the UK in each year for which figures are available. 
Damian Green: In conjunction with the Port Authority, Calais Chamber of Commerce, (CCC) and our contractors the UK Border Agency checks UK bound vehicles by means of a multi-layered regime, utilising a combination of detection technologies in order to screen 100% of vehicles for the presence of clandestines.
The Calais Chamber of Commerce supply statistical information to the UK Border Agency on the number of vehicles searched, however all of the information is supplied and owned by them and is commercial in confidence.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many freight vehicles were searched by the UK Border Agency for the purpose of detecting persons attempting to enter the UK illegally in each year for which figures are available. 
Damian Green: At the Juxtaposed controls of Calais, Coquelles, Dunkirk and Boulogne the UK Border Agency screened in excess of 1.7 million vehicles throughout 2006, over 1.8 million in 2007, in excess of 1.7 million in 2008, and over 1.5 million in both 2009 and 2010.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many illegal immigrants were detected entering the UK at each port in each year for which figures are available; and how each such case was disposed of. 
|Number of clandestine entrants detected at UK Border|
These figures are based on locally collated management information. They are not subject to the detailed checks that apply for National Statistics publications. The data are provisional and subject to change. We have not included inland detections of clandestine entrants because these entrants have by definition evaded the UK border control, nor detections made by overseas authorities at the juxtaposed controls in France and Belgium.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many illegal immigrants were detected in each (a) local authority area, (b) county and (c) region in each year for which figures are available. 
Damian Green: The records kept by the UK Border Agency regarding the arrest of illegal immigrants breaks down the figures by region. The data, for financial years 2009-10 and 2010-11 (up to December), are in the following table.
It is not possible to disaggregate these figures by local authority and county without incurring a disproportionate cost, as to determine this would require the manual examination of each record, to ensure their accuracy.
|Region||April 2009 to March 2010||April 2010 to December 2010||Total|
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the average cost of processing a case involving (a) an illegal immigrant and (b) an asylum seeker whose application for asylum is refused was in each year for which figures are available. 
Damian Green: The UK Border Agency has not previously collected these data, but since I became Minister for Immigration, I have asked the agency to show a greater focus on productivity and these, or similar, data will be more readily available in the future.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) illegal immigrants and (b) asylum seekers whose application for asylum was refused have been allowed to remain in the UK by (i) ministerial or other administrative decision, (ii) as a consequence of an appeal to a tribunal and (iii) as a result of an appeal through the courts made predominantly, entirely or partly on human rights grounds. 
Damian Green: We have interpreted illegal immigrants to mean individuals who have been served papers as immigration offenders, and refused asylum seekers to mean failed asylum seekers. Refused individuals who have been granted leave to remain by the Government, has been interpreted as individuals granted humanitarian protection or discretionary leave.
|(1) Data are for individuals served papers as immigration offenders, in 2008, 2009, and 2010.|
(2) Data are for individuals refused asylum based on initial decision, in 2008, 2009, and 2010.
(3) Data relate to main applicants only.
(4) Data relate to individuals refused, but allowed permission to remain in the UK by the Government on the grounds of humanitarian protection (HP) and discretionary leave (DL) at initial decision. HP and DL replaced exceptional leave to remain from 1 April 2003.
(5) Data relate to individuals who were granted leave following a successful appeal.
(6) Data relate to individuals who were granted leave following a successful appeal on human rights grounds. This is a subset of appeal allowed data.
All figures quoted are internal management information only and are subject to change. This information has not been quality assured under National Statistics protocols.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how much her Department spent on the operation of border controls (a) in the UK and (b) elsewhere in each of the last 30 years. 
|Border for ce resource cost|
The longest-running immigration appeals cases are cases that proceed through the court system to the Court of Appeal and the Supreme Court. There are no time limits for cases to be heard or judgments to be handed down at these courts. The length of time an appeal takes may be extended further should it be referred to the Court of Justice of the European Union. For the first two quarters of 2010-11 70,300 immigration appeals were received by the Tribunal Service and during the same period 73 appeals proceeded to the Court of Appeal, while four were determined at the Supreme Court.
Ann Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what recent assessment she has made of cases involving the sexual grooming of girls from children's homes; and if she will make a statement. 
James Brokenshire: No specific assessment has yet been carried out of cases of this kind. However, the Child Exploitation and Online Protection (CEOP) Centre have recently begun to conduct a thematic assessment of the nature and scale of child sexual exploitation in the UK as a whole. The results of the study will be published in due course.
Mr MacNeil: To ask the Leader of the House how many (a) press officers, (b) internal communications officers, (c) external communications officers, (d) communications strategy officers and (e) other positions with a communications remit were employed by (i) his Department, (ii) its agencies and (iii) each other non-departmental public body sponsored by his Department on the most recent date for which figures are available. 
Philip Davies: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what meetings he has had with members of the campaign team supporting a Yes vote in the proposed referendum on the alternative vote; and how many such meetings have taken place in premises owned by Government departments. 
The Deputy Prime Minister: For reasons of diary management and logistics I have had two meetings on official premises with representatives of the campaign team supporting a Yes vote in the proposed referendum on the Alternative Vote.
To ask the Secretary of State for Education what information his Department holds on (a) the number of children reported to have
experienced an asthma attack at school in the last 12 months and (b) the number of such children who were hospitalised in consequence. 
The hospital episode statistics show that there were 24,217 admissions to hospital of patients aged 0-14 suffering from asthma in the year ending March 2010. We do not know how many of these resulted from asthma attacks in schools, as we do not collect school-based information.
Mr Graham Stuart: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what recent assessment he has made of levels of understanding of the requirements of young people with autism among the children's workforce. 
Sarah Teather: We are committed to giving every child, and young person, the best possible start in life and recognise the importance of high quality teaching particularly for those with special educational needs (SEN). This is vital if they are to achieve their potential. We know that currently there are over 56,000 schoolchildren with an autistic spectrum disorder. I believe that local authorities are best placed to assess the skills and expertise of those who teach pupils with SEN and to develop their own plans to improve the quality of provision, working with schools and parents to ensure that the necessary expertise is in place in their area. We expect all local authorities to provide support for children with special educational needs and we will work with them to ensure that there is sufficient high-quality provision.
To support the understanding of the work force in relation to SEN we have published resources for use in initial teacher training and Continuing Professional Development through the Inclusion Development Programme. A specific resource focusing on supporting pupils with an autistic spectrum disorder is included.
In addition the Children's Workforce Development Council has been remitted to support those who work with disabled children and young people in mainstream and specialist settings. This includes determining what specialist skills, knowledge and behaviours are needed by people working with disabled children and young people.
Mrs Hodgson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what guidance his Department issues to local authorities on the criteria for, and monitoring of, private and voluntary sector providers of children's centres. 
The Department has not issued any guidance to local authorities on the criteria for, and monitoring of, private and voluntary sector providers of children's centres yet. One of the actions in the Departmental Easiness Plan, published in November
2010, is to work with local authorities to develop a plan to increase voluntary and community sector involvement with children's centres. We will be working with local authorities and other early years partners to co-produce this plan with them.
Mrs Hodgson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what meetings, visits or other engagements relating to her Ministerial duties the Minister of State for Children and Families has attended since her appointment; what the date and time was of each such engagement; and who attended each such engagement. 
Sarah Teather: I have had many meetings with individuals and organisations and have attended many official engagements relating to Government business as Minister of State for Children and Families. To provide the detailed information requested would incur disproportionate cost.
Mrs Hodgson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many meetings, visits or other engagements relating to the Ministerial duties of the Minister of State for Children and Families have been cancelled since May 2010; with whom each such engagement was to be held; what the date was of each such engagement; and (a) when and (b) for what reasons each such engagement was cancelled. 
Sarah Teather: Conflicting diary pressures and urgent parliamentary business often makes it necessary to cancel meetings, visits or official engagements at very short notice but endeavour to keep this to a minimum. The reasons for such cancellations are not recorded by the Department.
Ms Angela Eagle: To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will estimate the likely effect on students from poorer backgrounds in Wallasey constituency of the withdrawal of education maintenance allowance. 
Mr Gibb: We are committed to making sure that young people from low income households can continue in education and training post-16. We are considering the replacement for the education maintenance allowance and want to ensure that the funds we have are targeted on those young people who most need support to enable them to participate in education.
Robert Flello: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many (a) further education colleges, (b) sixth form colleges and (c) school sixth forms will receive (i) an increase or (ii) a decrease in overall funding per 16-19 year old as a result of implementation of the funding settlement issued by the Young People's Learning Agency on 20 December 2010; and if he will make a statement. 
[holding answer 24 January 2011]: The 16-19 funding statement, published by the Young People's Learning Agency (YPLA) on 20 December 2010, set out the Government's plans for 16-19 education and training for 2011/12. It set out the funding policy changes to be implemented in 2011/12 and stated there would be a system of transitional protection to smooth the implementation of changes year on year. For 2011/12 this will mean no provider facing a reduction in funding per student of more than 3%. The precise reduction or increase each provider will face will depend on its individual circumstances and the YPLA is currently working through those calculations. Allocations to all
schools and colleges for the 2011/12 academic year will be made by the end of March 2011.
Mr Gibb: The number of pupils known to be eligible for and claiming free school meals is shown in the following table. This includes full-time pupils aged 0 to 15 and part-time pupils aged five to 15.
|Maintained nursery( 1) , maintained primary( 2) , state-funded secondary( 2, 3) and special schools( 4) : School meal arrangements( 5) As at January 2010 by each ward within Kingswood parliamentary constituency|
|Nursery( 1) and primary( 2)||State-funded secondary( 2, 3)||Special( 4)|
|Number on roll( 5,6)||Number of pupils known to be eligible for and claiming free school meals( 5,6)||Percentage known to be eligible for and claiming free school meals||Number on roll( 5,6)||Number of pupils known to be eligible for and claiming free school meals( 5,6)||Percentage known to be eligible for and claiming free school meals||Number on roll( 5,6)||Number of pupils known to be eligible for and claiming free school meals( 5, 6)||Percentage known to be eligible for and claiming free school meals|
|n/a = Not applicable. No schools of this type.|
(1) There are no maintained nursery schools in Kingswood parliamentary constituency.
(2) Includes middle schools as deemed.
(3) Includes city technology colleges and academies.
(4) Includes maintained and non-maintained special schools, excludes general hospital schools.
(5) Includes sole and dual (main) registrations.
(6) Pupils who have full-time attendance and are aged 0 to 15, or pupils who have part-time attendance and are aged five to 15.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) if he will take steps to ensure that identical courses provided by colleges and a school sixth forms receive the same level of funding per student; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) what estimate he has made of the like-for-like funding difference between schools and colleges in each of the last three years; and what methodology his Department uses to calculate this figure. 
Mr Gibb: The White Paper "The Importance of Teaching", published in November 2010, set out the Government's commitment to end the disparity in funding for 16-19 year olds so that by 2015 schools and colleges are funded at the same level as one another. We want to achieve this in a carefully managed way over time so as not to destabilise providers. To ensure this is the case we are limiting the reduction in the average funding per student in 2011/12 to a maximum of 3% per student. The transitional protection will be removed over the spending review period.
In 2008 KPMG independently assessed the funding gap between school sixth forms and other providers at 5.6%. Since 2008 the gap has remained the same following the introduction of a consistent funding methodology between all types of providers. The methodology used by KPMG was to cost identical programmes for each provider type and then to assess the difference. The conclusion was that the gap was due to a 3% difference in funding rates and 2.6% paid to schools for teachers' pension payments. KPMG also stated that the Teachers' Pay Grant (TPG) was now a clearly identifiable grant for schools with sixth forms that was not available to FE and other providers. Including the TPG in the calculation widened the gap to 9.6%. Other factors such as differences in treatment for VAT were not considered to form part of the funding gap.
Mr Gibb [holding answer 7 February 2011]: The recent Schools White Paper confirms that we will support schools to offer triple science. We shall shortly announce details of how this support will be focused on increasing take up in the most deprived areas.
We have already taken steps to increase access, such as encouraging schools to offer triple science by including it in the English Baccalaureate. We are also taking steps to increase the number and quality of science teachers.
Tristram Hunt: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what representations he received from representatives of the crafts sector prior to reaching his decision to reduce higher education funding for the tuition of arts and humanities. 
In developing our proposals for reform of higher education funding we have received a number of representations from individuals and institutions, including in the craft sector. The reforms will shift the balance of public funds for teaching from direct grant to institutions to funding that follows the informed choices made by individual students. This will provide strong incentives for institutions to focus on providing high quality teaching as efficiently as possible. However, we do not expect the overall income of the sector to reduce. Putting together the remaining funding for recurrent grant for teaching and research and the Government's loans outlay to institutions on the upfront costs of graduate contributions, the aggregate effect could be that the total investment by this Department in institutions in England would rise in cash terms from around £9 billion in 2010-11 to around £10 billion in 2014-15 while broadly maintaining existing levels of participation.
Lyn Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many schools in (a) West Ham constituency, (b) the London borough of Newham and (c) London have had a reduction in the level of funding provided for extended out-of-hours provision in 2010-11. 
Sarah Teather: The Department does not collect data on the level of funding devolved by local authorities to individual schools for extended out-of-hours provision. How funding is distributed to individual schools is a matter for local determination. Nationally, the revenue funding provided to local authorities through the 2010-11 Standards Fund grant for the sustainability and disadvantage elements of extended services has not been reduced. From April 2011 onwards, funding for extended services currently provided to local authorities and schools through the Standards Fund will form part of the baseline for the Dedicated Schools Grant. Schools, including academies and free schools, will have freedom and flexibility to spend their budgets to support their pupils in the ways they judge best.
Stephen Phillips: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what meetings his Department has had with (a) deaf children, (b) parents of deaf children and (c) organisations representing deaf children on the special educational needs Green Paper since his appointment. 
Sarah Teather: The Green Paper on special educational needs and disabilities is being informed through a series of discussions with those representing a wide range of interests in this area, including the National Deaf Children's Society and the Special Educational Consortium, whose membership includes organisations representing deaf children. In addition, an open call for views was held, receiving over 1,800 responses, 40% of which were from parents, but also from voluntary organisations, including those representing deaf children.
The Department will continue to collaborate with a wide range of individuals and groups in developing the Green Paper, and during the consultation period following its publication. This will include engagement with children and young people with special educational needs and disabilities.
Sarah Teather: I am publishing a Green Paper to look at the wide range of issues concerning provision for children with special educational needs and disabilities. To inform this important work, I issued a call for views and have met parents, teachers, local authorities, charities and other groups. The call for views attracted over 1800 responses from a wide range of people and organisations. In order to give those views the most careful consideration I will be publishing the Green Paper in March 2011.
Mr Hayes: "Investing in Skills for Sustainable Growth" published in November 2010 set out our plans to introduce Government backed further education fee loans from 2013/14. The loans will be available for those aged 24 and over to undertake qualifications at Level 3 and above. The loans will be repaid on an income contingent basis in line with the approach for higher education fee loans which includes a repayment threshold of £21,000 and a write off after 30 years for any outstanding loan balance.
We are engaging with the representative bodies for colleges, training organisations and other providers to discuss implementation plans for FE fee loans. This includes the establishment of a stakeholder reference group to help identify the particular delivery arrangements appropriate for the FE and Skills sector.
Mr Gibb [holding answer 7 February 2011 ]: The Education Bill introduces reporting restrictions to prevent the publication of information that would identify teachers when allegations are made by or on behalf of a pupil until they are charged with a criminal offence. We will also revise guidance to highlight the fundamental importance of eradicating unnecessary delays in investigations, clarify that suspending teachers should never be an automatic response and emphasising the support that teachers are entitled to expect when facing such action.
Mrs Hodgson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education when he plans to answer question (a) 31966 and (b) 31965, on the activities of the Minister of State for Children and Families, tabled on 15 December 2010. 
Zac Goldsmith: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many young people in Richmond Park constituency were not in education, employment or training on the most recent date for which figures are available. 
Mr Gibb: Estimates of participation in education, training and employment for young people aged 16-18 are published by the Department in a Statistical First Release (SFR) each June and can be found on the Department's website:
This publication also contains additional tables that show the number and proportion of young people who participate in education and work based educational training in each local authority. However, these estimates only cover 16 and 17-year-olds, and do not include information on young people's employment.
Connexions Services collect information on the proportion of 16 to 18-year-olds who are not in education, employment or training (NEET) in each local authority area in England. These are published annually on the DFE website and the latest data for the end of 2009 are in the following table.
This data estimate that at the end of 2009, 170 (3.4%) 16 to 18-year-olds were not in education, employment or training in Kingston-upon-Thames and 120 (3.5%) in Richmond-upon-Thames local authorities. The figures cannot be broken down by parliamentary consistency.
|Proportion of 16 to 18-year-olds NEET: 2009( 1, 5)|
|16 to 18-year-olds NEET( 3, 4)|
|16 to 18-year-olds known to Connexions( 2)||Estimated number||Percentage||Percentage 16 to 18-year-olds whose current activity is not known|
|(1) 2009 data are an average of the figures provided by Connexions at the end of November 2009, December 2009 and January 2010. They include all young people known to Connexions who were aged 16, 17 or 18 at that time.|
(2) The number of 16 to 18-year-olds known to Connexions includes those whose education establishment is located in the local authority area, regardless of where the young person resides.
(3) 16 to 18-year-olds known to be undertaking a gap year, or in custody, are not recorded by Connexions as NEET.
(4) The number and percentage of 16 to 18-year-olds NEET have been adjusted to assume a proportion of those whose current activity is not known are NEET.
(5) The figures above cannot be compared with the DFE estimate of the proportion of young people NEET (SFR 20/2010). The DFE figures use a range of data from different sources to estimate the proportion of the population that is NEET, and relate to the young person's academic age.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|