| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Ethnic Monitoring
Mr. Chaytor: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment (1) what plans he has to introduce quality assurance procedures within Section 11-funded adult education; [66608]
- (2) what guidance he has issued to local education authorities relating to the means by which existing Section 11-funded adult education will be protected following the introduction of ethnic minority achievement grants; [66610]
(3) if he will ensure that, within the new administrative arrangements for ethnic minority achievement grants, the level of existing funding of adult education within each participating local education authority is ring-fenced before the retained and devolved proportions of the authority's allocations are set. [66609]
Mr. Charles Clarke: The Department's letter of 12 November 1998 to Chief Education Officers set out details of the new Standards Fund Ethnic Minority Achievement Grant. Subject to the receipt of good action plans, local education authorities will receive broadly the same allocations for the support of ethnic minority education in 1999-2000 as the Home Office provided under section 11 in 1998-99, including that element for adult education.
The Department's letter also set out the arrangements whereby up to 15 per cent. of allocations, or £150,000 whichever was the greater, might be held back to provide central services including adult education. This should be satisfactory for the vast majority of Authorities. However, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State will consider carefully, and on their merits, any cases which an Authority might make reflecting historically heavy investment in adult education.
LEAs are required to ensure that all Standards Fund grants are spent for the purpose for which they are paid and to monitor the quality of provision. In addition, the Department monitors and evaluates all Standards Fund expenditure.
21 Jan 1999 : Column: 526
Mr. Dalyell:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Employment, pursuant to the letter of 27 August (EM CC/614/2044) to the hon. Member for Linlithgow, what interim results he has received in respect of the non-statutory code of practice on unfair discrimination on grounds of age in the teaching profession. [65404]
Mr. Charles Clarke:
The draft Code of Practice we have been developing with key external partners was published for wider consultation, including amongst those with responsibilities for the employment of teachers, in November 1998. We were very pleased with the wide interest the Code prompted, with over 9,000 copies being distributed. The consultation ended on 8 January 1999 and we are currently analysing the responses. The analysis will be published in due course and the final version of the Code will be launched in the Spring.
Mr. Cousins:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if, pursuant to the answer given to the right hon. Member for Birkenhead (Mr. Field) on 12 January 1999, Official Report, column 152, he will state (a) the assumptions about the growth of the minimum income guarantee relative to prices and earnings and (b) the number and proportion of state second pensioners who will be receiving the pensioners' minimum income guarantee in the years up to 2050. [66469]
Mr. Timms:
Information is not available in the form requested. Such information as is available is as follows.
It is assumed that, from the announced rates for April 1999, the Minimum Income Guarantee is uprated in line with the growth in average earnings (assumed to be 1.5 per cent. per year more than the growth in prices).
Estimates are not available of the number of pensioners who would be receiving payments of state second pension in future years. Overall, estimates taken from the PENSIM model suggest that under the new insurance contract for pensions approximately 1 in 4 pensioner units (2.5 million) would receive income from the Minimum Income Guarantee in 2050, and a lower proportion in years after 2050.
Projections forward to the year 2050 are subject to a high degree of uncertainty, given the number of assumptions in making them. Some of those who will be pensioners in 2050 have yet to begin work, and most are today in their 20s and 30s.
Estimates made by extrapolating projections from the PENSIM model can give only a broad indication of the likely order of magnitude of figures so far into the future.
Mr. Cousins:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will estimate the savings in income support or minimum pensioner income guarantee payments each year after 1 April 1999 till 1 April 2007 arising from the introduction of pensions splitting. [66462]
21 Jan 1999 : Column: 527
Mr. Timms:
The information is not available in the form requested. Such information as is available is as follows.
Legislation to enable pensions to be shared at the time of divorce will be included in the forthcoming Welfare Reform Bill.
The financial implications of pension sharing are uncertain, and will depend on the number of spouses who obtain a pension share and the percentage of pension which is transferred. Current estimates are based on the assumption that there could be from 35,000 to 65,000 cases per year, with a central assumption of 50,000. All estimates made are also dependent on a large number of other assumptions and should be considered illustrative.
It is expected that any impact on the minimum income guarantee will initially be small, as income support entitlement will not be altered until a pension share comes into payment. As most divorces take place before the age of 40, it is likely that, in most cases, there will be a significant time lapse between a pension share being made and income being received from the pension. Broad estimates of the impact 20 years after implementation suggest that, using the central assumption of 50,000 pension shares per year, pension sharing on divorce could lead to a saving on all income related benefits of around £10 million (within a range of £0--£30 million using alternative assumptions).
Mr. Wigley:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will extend Direction 25 of the Social Fund to include 16 to 18-year-olds who are on a youth training placement. [66156]
Angela Eagle:
It is not appropriate to extend Direction 25 to include 16-18 year olds on youth training placements. Payments from the Discretionary Social Fund are made from a cash limited budget and available resources must be targeted on those most in need of help. Eligibility for Social Fund Community Care Grants is therefore restricted by Direction 25 to those entitled to Income Support or income based Jobseeker's Allowance.
Provision already exists to allow vulnerable 16-17 year olds to receive Income Support and income-based Jobseeker's Allowance and, in turn, access to Community Care Grants.
Mr. Oaten:
To ask the Secretary of State for Social Security if he will place in the Library a copy of the responses his Department has received following the consultation process for the paper, "A New Contract for Welfare: Support for Disabled People". [66828]
Mr. Bayley:
I refer the hon. Member to the Written Answer I gave to my hon. Friend the Member for Salford (Ms Blears) on 19 January 1999, Official Report, column 402.
21 Jan 1999 : Column: 528
Mr. Hancock:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what evaluation he has made of the use of space and the state of the equipment in COB2 building at the Portsmouth Naval Base. [66178]
Mr. Spellar:
This is a matter for the Chief Executive of the Naval Bases and Supply Agency. I have asked the Chief Executive to write to the hon. Member.
Letter from J. A. Trewby to Mr. Michael Hancock, dated 21 January 1999:
Mr. Hancock:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the displacement of the Vanguard class of submarines. [66172]
Mr. Spellar:
The displacement of Vanguard class submarines, when submerged, is about 16,000 tons.
Mr. Hancock:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the anticipated hull life of the Trafalgar class of submarines. [66667]
Mr. Doug Henderson:
The initial design life of Trafalgar class submarine hulls was 25 years, although there is sufficient margin to extend the life of the submarines as necessary, subject to monitoring to ensure the continuing safety of the submarines.
The Secretary of State for Defence has asked me to reply to your Question on what evaluation he has made of the use of space and the state of the equipment in Central Office Block 2 (COB2) building at HM Naval Base Portsmouth, as this falls within my areas of responsibility.
COB2 is an office administration building. A study was completed in 1997 which showed that the building's usage conformed with Departmental Standards for space utilisation. The equipment in the building compromises of normal office equipment, ie. computers, telephones, and service equipment such as lifts and lights. These are regularly maintained and updated as requirements demand.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |