| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
21 May 2004 : Column 1230W—continued
Blackpool Tram System
Mr. Gordon Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment his Department has made of the regeneration effects of (a) proceeding and (b) not proceeding with the proposed upgrade of the Blackpool tram system. [173914]
Mr. McNulty: The regeneration impacts of proceeding and not proceeding with the tramway upgrade were assessed in an Economic Impact Report provided by the promoters. The Department has not made its own assessment.
Bristol Airport
Mr. Paul Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on proposals to expand the capacity of Bristol airport. [175098]
Mr. McNulty: The Air Transport White Paper stated that the main potential for growth in the South West would be at Bristol Airport. We support the Airport's development to around 12 million passengers per annum to include a runway extension and new terminal south of the existing runway, when these are required, having due regard to the environmental impacts that would accompany its expansion.
Bus Users (London)
Mr. Truswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the socio-economic breakdown of bus users in London. [174715]
Mr. McNulty: The National Travel Survey provides the information for people aged 16 and over living in households in Great Britain for the period 1998–2000, according to their area of residence.
The table shows the percentage of users in each socio-economic group, both inside and outside London. Note that tourists are not included in this breakdown:
| All persons aged 16 and over | Bus users(1) | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Socio-economic group (SEG) | Inside London | Outside London | Inside London | Outside London |
| Professional/managerial | 18 | 14 | 16 | 8 |
| Intermediate non-manual | 12 | 9 | 12 | 8 |
| Junior non-manual | 13 | 12 | 13 | 13 |
| Skilled manual | 10 | 12 | 8 | 8 |
| Other manual/other SEGs | 11 | 14 | 12 | 17 |
| Retired | 21 | 27 | 23 | 30 |
| Other economically inactive | 15 | 12 | 16 | 15 |
| All persons | 100 | 100 | 100 | 100 |
(1) Use a local bus more than twice a year (in London this is 72 per cent. of all persons aged 16 and over and outside London it is 43 per cent.).
21 May 2004 : Column 1231W
Car-Sharing
Mr. Paul Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what research his Department has undertaken into the (a) growth and (b) popularity of formal car-sharing through online systems. [173314]
Mr. McNulty: I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 13 May 2004, Official Report, column 490W.
Channel Tunnel Rail Link
Mr. Whittingdale: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much clay will be produced as a result of excavations to build the new Channel Tunnel link station at Stratford; and how it is proposed to dispose of it. [175030]
Mr. McNulty: About 270,000 cubic metres of clay have been excavated to form the station box at Stratford. The clay was deposited on the Stratford Lands, where the surface is being raised by about 6 m for the redevelopment of the lands.
Civil Servants
Mr. Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many civil servants were employed by communication division in his Department on the last date for which figures are available. [174326]
Mr. McNulty: As at 1 May 2004, the number of staff employed in the Department's Communication Directorate was 73.1 (full time equivalents). This figure breaks down as follows:
| Number | |
|---|---|
| Director | 1 |
| Press Officers | 15 |
| Publications (print, publishing and external websites) | 12 |
| Publicity (campaigns) | 10.8 |
| Strategic Communications | 8.8 |
| Internal Communications | 9.5 |
| Business Management (finance, procurement, human resources, IT, business and secretarial support) | 16 |
| Total | 73.1 |
Consultants and Advisers
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how much his Department and its agencies and non-departmental public bodies spent on external consultants and advisers in each of the last three years. [172434]
Mr. McNulty: Details of spend on external consultants and advisers by the central Department, agencies and non-departmental public bodies is shown in the following table.
(2) The Department was formed in May 2002. Figures for the central Department are not available for 2001–02 or prior years.
21 May 2004 : Column 1232W
Light Rail
Mr. Damian Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) what assessment he has made of the levels of private sector investment in (a) commercial and (b) housing property along the lines of light rail routes in each year since 1997; [171947]
(2) what assessment he has made of the effect that light rail systems have had on urban regeneration since 1997; and if he will make a statement. [171948]
Mr. McNulty: The Department makes no annual assessment of the levels of private investment along light rail routes. The Department part funded a programme of research on the regeneration impacts of Sheffield Supertram which concluded in 1997. This showed little effect, however the tram only became fully operational in 1995 and any significant changes would be more gradual.
Rolling Stock Companies
Mr. Truswell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the (a) annual capital lease charge and (b) annual heavy maintenance charge made by rollng stock companies to train operators are for (i) a two carriage class 142 Pacer train, (ii) a two carriage class 143 Pacer train, (iii) a two carriage class 156 Sprinter train, (iv) a two carriage class 150 Sprinter train and (v) a four car class 333 train. [173467]
Mr. McNulty: The rate to be paid for a particular type of rolling stock for use on a particular franchise is a commercial matter between the rolling stock owner and the train operator.
EDUCATION AND SKILLS
Education Funding
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public money was spent on education in Chorley in each year between 1992 and 1997. [164183]
Mr. Miliband: The information requested is submitted according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Chorley is a district of Lancashire Local Education Authority. The information for Lancashire LEA is as follows:
| Total net current expenditure | |
|---|---|
| 1992–93 | 649,469 |
| 1993–94 | 594,252 |
| 1994–95 | 596,785 |
| 1995–96 | 583,921 |
| 1996–97 | 590,313 |
| 1997–98 | 600,316 |
Notes:
1. The financial data are taken from Lancashire LEA's RO1 statement submitted to the Department of Environment, Transport and the Regions.
2. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEA.
3. In 1992–93 Net Current Expenditure after recharges was not collected on RO1. In this year Net Recurrent Expenditure is used and consequently figures for this year may not be strictly comparable with those for future years.
4. Figures are for Lancashire LEA prior to the local government reorganisation in 1998–99.
21 May 2004 : Column 1233W
Jim Dobbin: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public funding was spent per pupil in Heywood and Middleton in each of the last seven years. [168580]
Mr. Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Heywood and Middleton is a district of Rochdale local education authority. The information for Rochdale LEA is as follows:
| Pre-Primary Education | Primary Education | Pre-Primary and Primary Education | Secondary Education | Special Schools | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996–97 | n/a | n/a | 1,800 | 2,605 | 12,959 |
| 1997–98 | n/a | n/a | 1,841 | 2,658 | 13,211 |
| 1998–99 | n/a | n/a | 1,952 | 2,685 | 13,276 |
| 1999–2000 | 5,105 | 2,100 | 2,161 | 2,804 | 13,438 |
| 2000–01 | 12,322 | 2,315 | 2,509 | 3,070 | 15,180 |
| 2001–02 | 21,017 | 2,551 | 2,747 | 3,381 | 16,007 |
| 2002–03 | — | — | 2,793 | — | 3,690 |
Notes:
1. The financial data are taken from Rochdale LEA's Section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the Section 52 outturn statement in 1999–2000. 1999–2000 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance.
2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data is subject to change by the LEA. Figures are rounded to the nearest £10.
3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEA.
4. The NCE per pupil figures for pre-primary and primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the pre-primary sector and maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained nursery and primary schools sector.
5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
6. The NCE per pupil figures for special schools relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained special schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained special schools sector.
7. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.
21 May 2004 : Column 1234W
James Purnell: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public funding was spent per pupil in Stalybridge and Hyde in each of the last seven years. [168759]
Mr. Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Stalybridge and Hyde is a district of Tameside local education authority. The information for Tameside LEA is as follows:
| Pre-Primary Education | Primary Education | Pre-Primary and Primary Education | Secondary Education | Special Schools | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996–97 | n/a | n/a | 1,743 | 2,304 | 12,097 |
| 1997–98 | n/a | n/a | 1,779 | 2,449 | 12,876 |
| 1998–99 | n/a | n/a | 1,929 | 2,528 | 13,371 |
| 1999–2000 | 11,672 | 2,065 | 2,116 | 2,579 | 22,081 |
| 2000–01 | 21,005 | 2,237 | 2,334 | 2,860 | 24,175 |
| 2001–02 | 25,103 | 2,690 | 2,794 | 3,221 | 21,455 |
| 2002–03 | — | 2,786 | — | 3,260 | — |
Notes:
1. The financial data are taken from Tameside LEA's Section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's R01 statement previously. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the Section 52 outturn statement in 1999–2000. 1999–2000 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance.
2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data is subject to change by the LEA. Figures are adjusted to 2002–03 prices using the March 2004 GDP deflators.
3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEAs.
4. The NCE per pupil figures for pre-primary and primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the pre-primary sector and maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained nursery and primary schools sector.
5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
6. The NCE per pupil figures for special schools relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained special schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained special schools sector.
7. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.
Mr. McLoughlin: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public money was spent on education in the constituency of West Derbyshire between (a) 1992 and 1997, (b) 1997 and 2001 and (c) 2001 and 2004. [163736]
Mr. Miliband:
The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area West Derbyshire is a district of Derbyshire Local Education Authority. The latest information for Derbyshire LEA is contained in the following table. Information on the current year 2004–05 will not be available until the end of 2005.
21 May 2004 : Column 1235W
| £ | |
|---|---|
| 1992–93 to 1996–97 | 1,740,789 |
| 1997–98 to 2000–01 | 1,104,187 |
| 2001–02 to 2002–03 | 728,225 |
Notes:
1. The financial data are taken from Derbyshire LEA's Section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–00 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously. Figures up to and including 1996–97 are for Derbyshire LEA prior to local government reorganisation. From 1997–98 onwards Derbyshire LEA was split into Derbyshire and Derby LEAs. 1999–00 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance.
2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data is subject to change by the LEA. Figures are rounded to the nearest £10.
3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEA.
4. In 1992–93 Net Current Expenditure after recharges was not collected on RO1. In this year Net Recurrent Expenditure is used and consequently figures for this year may not be strictly comparable with those for future years.
Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public funding was spent per pupil in Birkenhead in each of the last seven years. [166300]
Mr. Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Birkenhead is a district of Wirral local education authority. The information for Wirral LEA is as follows:
| Pre-primary education | Primary education | Pre-primary and primary education | Secondary education | Special schools | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996–97 | n/a | n/a | 1,830 | 2,570 | 12,350 |
| 1997–98 | n/a | n/a | 1,780 | 2,570 | 13,350 |
| 1998–99 | n/a | n/a | 2,020 | 2,690 | 13,450 |
| 1999–2000 | 20,060 | 2,120 | 2,220 | 2,850 | 15,100 |
| 2000–01 | 28,700 | 2,360 | 2,510 | 3,060 | 16,180 |
| 2001–02 | 34,050 | 2,680 | 2,850 | 3,420 | 18,400 |
| 2002–03 | — | 2,980 | — | 3,760 | — |
Notes:
1. The financial data are taken from Wirral LEA's section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the section 52 outturn statement in 1999–2000. 1999–2000 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance.
2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data are subject to change by the LEA. All figures are rounded to the nearest £10.
3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEAs.
4. The NCE per pupil figures for pre-primary and primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the pre-primary sector and maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained nursery and primary schools sector.
5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
6. The NCE per pupil figures for special schools relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained special schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained special schools sector.
7. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.
21 May 2004 : Column 1236W
Mr. Ben Chapman: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public funding was spent per pupil in Wirral, South in each of the last seven years. [166624]
Mr. Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Wirral, South is a district of Wirral local education authority. The information for Wirral LEA is as follows:
| Pre-primary education | Primary education | Pre-primary and primary education | Secondary education | Special schools | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996–97 | n/a | n/a | 1,830 | 2,570 | 12,350 |
| 1997–98 | n/a | n/a | 1,780 | 2,570 | 13,350 |
| 1998–99 | n/a | n/a | 2,020 | 2,690 | 13,450 |
| 1999–2000 | 20,060 | 2,120 | 2,220 | 2,850 | 15,100 |
| 2000–01 | 28,700 | 2,360 | 2,510 | 3,060 | 16,180 |
| 2001–02 | 34,050 | 2,680 | 2,850 | 3,420 | 18,400 |
| 2002–03 | — | 2,980 | — | 3,760 | — |
Notes:
1. The financial data are taken from Wirral LEA's section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the section 52 outturn statement in 1999–2000. 1999–2000 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance.
2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data are subject to change by the LEA. All figures are rounded to the nearest £10.
3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEAs.
4. The NCE per pupil figures for pre-primary and primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the pre-primary sector and maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained nursery and primary schools sector.
5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
6. The NCE per pupil figures for special schools relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained special schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained special schools sector.
7. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.
21 May 2004 : Column 1237W
Mr. Wyatt: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public money was spent on education in the constituency of Sittingbourne and Sheppey between (a) 1992 and 1997, (b) 1997 and 2001 and (c) 2001 and 2004. [159487]
Mr. Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Sittingbourne and Sheppey is a district of Kent local education authority. The latest information available for Kent LEA is as follows.
| £000 | |
|---|---|
| 1992–93 to 1996–97 | 2,514,790 |
| 1997–98 to 2000–01 | 2,138,194 |
| 2001–02 to 2002–03 | 1,411,520 |
Notes:
1. The financial data are taken from Kent LEA's Section 52 Outturn Statements submitted to the DfES from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's R01 statement prior to then. 1999–2000 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance. Figures up to and including 1997–98 are for Kent LEA prior to local government re-organisation. From 1998–99 onwards parts of Kent LEA became Rochester and Gillingham LEA.
2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data is subject to change by the LEA. Figures are rounded to the nearest 10.
3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEA.
4. In 1992–93 NCE after recharges was not collected on R01. In this year Net Recurrent Expenditure is used and consequently figures for this year may not be strictly comparable with those for future years.
Mr. Pike: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public funding was spent per pupil in Burnley in each of the last seven years. [167917]
Mr. Miliband: The information requested is submitted to the Department according to local education authority areas rather than districts within an area. Burnley is a district of Lancashire local education authority. The information for Lancashire LEA is as follows:
| Pre-Primary Education | Primary Education | Pre-Primary and Primary Education | Secondary Education | Special Schools | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1996–97 | n/a | n/a | 1,805 | 2,594 | 15,988 |
| 1997–98 | n/a | n/a | 1,824 | 2,631 | 17,315 |
| 1998–99 | n/a | n/a | 2,002 | 2,701 | 17,768 |
| 1999–00 | 7,130 | 2,108 | 2,173 | 2,763 | 18,487 |
| 2000–01 | 11,033 | 2,326 | 2,437 | 2,914 | 18,768 |
| 2001–02 | 16,391 | 2,629 | 2,797 | 3,230 | 20,597 |
| 2002–03 | — | 2,898 | — | 3,399 | — |
Notes:
1. The financial data are taken from Lancashire LEA's Section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–2000 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the Section 52 outturn statement in 1999–2000. 1999–2000 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance. Up to 1997–98 figures are for Lancashire LEA prior to local government reorganisation. From 1998–99 onwards parts of Lancashire LEA became Blackpool and Blackburn LEAs.
2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data are subject to change by the LEA. Figures are rounded to the nearest £10.
3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEAs.
4. The NCE per pupil figures for pre-primary and primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the pre-primary sector and maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained nursery and primary schools sector.
5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
6. The NCE per pupil figures for special schools relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained special schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained special schools sector.
7. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.
21 May 2004 : Column 1238W
Mr. Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how much public funding was spent per pupil in the Lancashire Local Education Authority in each year since 1997. [165541]
Mr. Miliband: The information requested is contained in the following table:
| Pre-primary Education | Primary Education | Pre-Primary and Primary Education | Secondary Education | Special Schools | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1997–98 | (3)— | (3)— | 1,824 | 2,631 | 17,315 |
| 1998–99 | (3)— | (3)— | 2,002 | 2,701 | 17,768 |
| 1999–2000 | 7,130 | 2,108 | 2,173 | 2,763 | 18,487 |
| 2000–01 | 11,030 | 2,326 | 2,437 | 2,914 | 18,768 |
| 2001–02 | 16,391 | 2,629 | 2,797 | 3,230 | 20,597 |
| 2002–03 | — | 3,399 | — | — | — |
(3) Non Applicable
Notes:
1. The financial data are taken from Lancashire LEA's section 52 Outturn Statement submitted to the DfES from 1999–00 onwards and the ODPM's RO1 statement previously. Expenditure was not distinguished between pre-primary and primary sectors until the inception of the Section 52 outturn statement in 1999–00. 1999–00 figures reflect the return of GM schools to local authority maintenance. Up to 1997–98 figures are for Lancashire LEA prior to local government reorganisation. From 1998–99 onwards parts of Lancashire LEA became Blackpool and Blackburn LEAs.
2. The outturn 2002–03 tables captured the data in a fundamentally different way to the previous years. Categories were aligned with the Consistent Financial Reporting framework and the spending by LEAs was no longer split by school sector. Consequently the unit costs per pupil in 2002–03 are not strictly comparable with earlier years as they include an apportionment of LEA expenditure based on pupil numbers. 2002–03 data is subject to change by the LEA. Pupil data are drawn from the Annual Schools Census adjusted to be on a financial year basis.
3. Net current expenditure (NCE) includes expenditure within schools and also that incurred centrally by the LEAs.
4. The NCE per pupil figures for pre-primary and primary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in the pre-primary sector and maintained primary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained nursery and primary schools sector.
5. The NCE per pupil figures for secondary relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained secondary schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained secondary schools sector.
6. The NCE per pupil figures for special schools relate the net current expenditure (after recharges) in maintained special schools to the total number of financial year pupils who are educated in the maintained special schools sector.
21 May 2004 : Column 1239W
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |