Previous Section Index Home Page

13 Jan 2004 : Column 674W—continued

Speed Cameras

Mr. Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much of the money raised in fines by the Essex Safety Camera Partnership was spent on traffic-calming measures and other safety projects in Essex,

13 Jan 2004 : Column 675W

other than the installation and operating of speed cameras, in each of the last six years for (a) Billericay and district, (b) Basildon district and (c) Essex; and what percentage this represented of the total money raised in fines for each year. [147564]

Mr. Jamieson: Fine revenue from the cost recovery system can only be used to fund safety camera operations and not for any other purposes. Other funding sources are available to local authorities to use on other road safety measures.

Mr. Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many speed enforcement cameras have been (a) removed, (b) relocated and (c) disabled as a result of his recent letter to safety camera partnerships; and if he will place a copy of his letter in the Library. [147757]

Mr. Jamieson: The letter from the Department for Transport to the partnerships, dated 19 December, was sent by the Head of Road Safety Division. It asked partnerships to confirm that they are adhering strictly to the guidance and rules of the safety camera netting off arrangement in siting the cameras and ensuring all requirements relating to speed limit setting and signing are in place. I shall keep the House informed.

A copy of the letter has been placed in the Library of the House.

Mr. Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to his answer of 22 December 2003, Official Report, column 52W, if he will set out in respect of each safety camera partnership the last quarter for which monitoring information and data has been received by (a) his Department and (b) its consultants; and if he will place a copy in the Library. [147759]

Mr. Jamieson: The results of the last complete year's monitoring to 31 March 2003 will be contained in the next annual report of the safety camera programme that is due to be published in March and will be placed in the Library of the House.

Traffic Management Bill

Mr. Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether it is the policy of the Government that traffic officers appointed under the Traffic Management Bill should be subject to positive vetting. [145537]

Mr. Jamieson: The safety and protection of the travelling public is of paramount importance to the Government.

The level of security and criminal record checks that the Highways Agency is expected to apply are equivalent to those that exist for staff currently employed by the Police service, such as Traffic Police and Community Support Officers.

As well as undertaking a check against security service records, the Highways Agency is also in the process of registering with the Criminal Records Bureau (CRB). Registration with the CRB will enable the Agency to pick up all criminal convictions, and carry out checks against relevant departmental and police records.

13 Jan 2004 : Column 676W


Armed Forces Accommodation

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what procedures his Department uses to ensure that service accommodation is managed and maintained to standards that are acceptable to the tenants. [146831]

Mr. Caplin: I refer the hon. Member to the Defence Housing Executive's Key Targets for Financial Year 2003–04, set out in my written ministerial statement of 2 July 2003, Official Report, column 19WS. The Key Targets include allocation times, repairs, upgrades and customer satisfaction. Full details are set out in the DHE Corporate Plan 2003, copies of which are available in the Library of the House.

Army Redress (Appeals)

Mr. Keetch: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the procedures are for (a) officers and (b) other ranks in the Army to appeal against army redress decisions; and if he will make a statement. [145730]

Mr. Caplin: The procedures governing appeals against army redress decisions are contained within section 180 of the Army Act 1955, Chapter 5 of Queen's Regulations and Army General and Administrative Instructions, Volume 2, Chapter 70. Officers and other ranks who make a complaint and who do not obtain the redress to which they think they are entitled, may submit their complaint to the Defence Council (the Army Board acting as the Defence Council). The procedures require the complaint to proceed through a series of levels in the chain of command, any of which may resolve the matter to the satisfaction of the complainant, before it is considered by the Defence Council. If officers do not obtain from the Defence Council the redress they seek, they have the further opportunity to require the Defence Council to make a report on the complaint to Her Majesty and she has the power to look into the case further, acting on the advice of my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence.

Art Acquisition

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department has spent on the acquisition of works of art in each year since 1997, broken down by amounts spent on (a) paintings and (b) sculpture; what the single most expensive piece of art purchased by his Department since 1997 has been; how much it cost; and what the total revenue raised by his Department through sales of works of art has been since 1997. [142358]

Mr. Caplin: Since 1997 the Ministry of Defence has purchased one painting—a portrait of Admiral Leach, at a cost of £5,000. No works of sculpture have been purchased, and no works of art have been sold.

Cluster Munitions

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many of the cluster artillery shells purchased from BAE Systems in 2003 have been used; how many remain in storage; and what the period of possible utility is of the unused ones. [146990]

13 Jan 2004 : Column 677W

Mr. Ingram: No cluster artillery shells purchased from BAE Systems in 2003 have been used in Iraq during Operation Telic. Shells purchased from BAE Systems have been put into store to maintain operational stock levels. The ammunition used during Operation Telic was from a procurement made in 1996; therefore the full quantity ordered remains in storage. This ammunition has a shelf life of 10 years.

Defence Housing Executive

Mr. Soames: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recourse is available to armed forces personnel who consider that complaints and problems relating to their accommodation have not been dealt with adequately by the Defence Housing Executive. [147283]

Mr. Caplin: The Defence Housing Executive (DHE) has a 5-step complaints procedure which directs the occupant through the organisation from local DHE office level to the Chief Executive. If still unsatisfied, the occupant can write to the Deputy Chief of Defence Staff (Personnel), DHE's owner. This procedure is fully explained in the Occupants Handbook, a copy of which is provided to all occupants of Service family housing.

Serving personnel are also able to raise matters through their chain of command or make a formal complaint under the Service redress of grievance procedure.

The DHE Occupants Handbook also lists bodies that may be consulted for independent advice, such as Citizens' Advice Bureaux and Service welfare organisations. Leaflets containing information about complaints are on display in community facilities in DHE estates, and reminders are published from time to time in DHE's customer magazine 'Living in Families Quarters'.

Departmental Advertising

Mr. Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the total expenditure on information campaigns and advertising was for his Department for each year since 1997. [145673]

Mr. Caplin: Details of the Ministry of Defence's expenditure on advertising and publicity have historically been included in the annual Departmental Performance Reports, copies of which have been placed in the Library of the House. For 1996–97 the information is shown on page 49 Cm 3781; for 1997–98, the information is shown on page 49, Cm 4170; for 1999–2000 the information is shown on page 60, Cm 5000; for 2000–01 the information is shown on page 68, Cm 5290 and for 2001–02 the information is shown on page 71, Cm 5661.

Figures for 1998–99 were not provided in the Annual Performance Report and are as follows:

CategoryExpenditure (£ million)
Royal Navy/Royal Fleet Auxiliary6.65
Royal Air Force10.17
PR, marketing and business support services0.84
Chief of Public Relations expenditure2.39
Sales promotion1.06
National Employers Liaison Committee (Territorial Army)1.05

13 Jan 2004 : Column 678W

The introduction of Resource Accounting and Budgeting in the Ministry of Defence has changed the way we account for and record our expenditure. I can confirm that the final outturn for publicity and recruitment, which includes advertising, for 2002–03 was £52.5 million. However, the detailed breakdown could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

Next Section Index Home Page