| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
24 Jan 2005 : Column 63W—continued
NORTHERN IRELAND
Belfast Agreement
Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what amendments he expects will need to be proposed to the Belfast Agreement as a consequence of the adoption of the 'Proposals by the British and Irish Governments for a Comprehensive Agreement.' [206890]
Mr. Paul Murphy: As I said in this House on 9 December, the Agreement was not set in stone when first signed and it was clearly always the intention that certain elements would be open to change; the commitment to review and report on its operation, which was written into the Agreement itself, would have made no sense otherwise. Equally, certain fundamental aspects of the Agreement have always been regarded by the Governments and the other parties who supported it as fundamental, and not open to change.
We do not envisage any textual amendment of the Agreement at all. But, as the hon. Lady will have seen, our proposals would involve a number of changes in the way the Agreement operates.
Children's Fund
Mrs. Iris Robinson: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the impact of the Children's Fund on service development in the Province. [202598]
Mr. Pearson: The Children's Fund has provided time-bounded service development funding through both the statutory and the voluntary and community sectors. Two statutory rounds of funding, one in April 2001 and the other in June 2002, provided a total of £20.5 million in support of 26 projects. A further allocation of some £17 million was announced on 5 March 2003 to the voluntary and community sector funding 101 projects over three years commencing 1 April 2003.
While there will be no new funding via the Children's Fund, £15 million has been allocated in the recent Budget for a Capital Modernisation Fund to which children's organisations will be able to apply for support.
Civil Servants
Mr. Gregory Campbell:
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many employees of the Department of (a) Education, (b) Social Development, (c) Regional Development, (d) Culture Arts and Leisure, (e) Environment, (f) the First and Deputy First Minister, (g) Education and Learning, (h) Health,
24 Jan 2005 : Column 64W
Personal Social Services and Safety, (i) Enterprise, Trade and Investment, (j) Agriculture and Rural Development and (k) Finance and Personnel have been subject to disciplinary proceedings in the last 12 months; and what the total workforce is of each Department. [208699]
Mr. Pearson: During the last 12 months (January to December 2004), a total of 325 members of staff working in the Departments listed were subject to disciplinary proceedings. The breakdown for each Department, which includes staff working in executive agencies, together with the total workforce for each, is as follows:
Londonderry Airport
Mr. Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland when he will announce his decision on the funding requests from Londonderry city council regarding Londonderry airport. [210343]
Mr. Spellar: I hope that an announcement can be made soon. Issues relating to the economic benefits to the northwest of investment in the airport, options for governance of the airport and state aid are still being considered.
Ministerial Engagements
Mr. Gummer: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will list the ministerial engagements (a) out of London and (b) in London that he has cancelled since 1 January 2004. [209215]
Mr. Murphy: There is no record kept of cancelled engagements in Northern Ireland Office Minister's diaries. When engagements have had to be cancelled, wherever possible we try to re-instate them at a later date. All engagements are subject to ministerial and parliamentary business.
Parliamentary Questions
Dr. Cable:
To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what target his Department sets for the maximum acceptable time to respond in full to a parliamentary question; and what percentage of
24 Jan 2005 : Column 65W
answers given by his Department failed to meet this target in each parliamentary session from 1997–98 to 2003–04. [202558]
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many written questions for his Department were unanswered when Parliament prorogued; and how many of the unanswered questions were tabled in each of the previous months of the 2003–04 session. [201556]
Mr. Paul Murphy: I refer to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Ribble Valley (Mr. Evans) on 30 November 2004, Official Report, column 62W.
Information is not held in the format requested. While it is not always possible, the Northern Ireland Office, including the 11 Departments of the Northern Ireland Administration, aims to answer all ordinary written questions within one working week and all named day questions on the day named for answer. An average of 75 per cent. of questions were answered on time in the 2003–04 session. Information is not readily available for the 1997–98 session.
Water Industry
Mr. McGrady: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will make a statement on the condition of Northern Ireland's water infrastructure; and what the main cause was of the failure of that infrastructure to meet EU Directive standards. [208414]
Mr. Spellar: The information is as follows:
Letter from Mrs. Katharine Bryan to Mr. Eddie McGrady, dated 20 January 2005:
You recently asked the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland a parliamentary Question about the condition of Northern Ireland's water infrastructure and the main cause of the failure of that infrastructure to meet EU Directive standards (208414). I have been asked to reply as the issue falls within my responsibility as Chief Executive of Water Service.
Water Service's second Asset Management Plan (NIAMP2), which was completed in 2003, identified that £2.9 billion needs to be invested over the next 20 years to modernise the existing water and sewerage infrastructure. NIAMP2 assessed the condition of the Water Service's above ground assets including treatment works, pumping stations, etc. and less than 5 per cent. were considered to be in poor condition or functionally unsound. While the condition of the above ground assets is generally good, many of the current treatment works were not designed to meet the more stringent standards associated with current EU Directives. The upgrading of water and wastewater treatment works accounts for £1 billion of the total investment required. It is much more difficult to define the condition of below ground assets, but use of an industry recognised statistical model identified an investment need for this asset group of almost double that required for above ground assets. Over two-thirds of this below ground investment is attributable to keeping the networks in a serviceable condition over the 20 year period.
The failure of the water and sewerage infrastructure to meet current EU Directives relates mainly to the fact that many of the current treatment works need to be upgraded. New treatment processes associated with new technology are often needed to meet the quality standards associated with current EU Directives. Priority is at present being given to upgrading water and wastewater treatment works and it is planned to accelerate spending on network refurbishment within the next few years as the treatment works upgrading programme nears completion.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |