|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Drew: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister (1) what the evidential basis was for the assertions made in the letter to chairs of fire authorities in the south-west that one of them had leaked figures for the outline business case for regional control centres to the Fire Brigades Union; 
Mr. Raynsford: The letter in question was sent to all the chairs of Fire and Rescue Authorities (FRAs) in England. It did not accuse any specific authority of leaking information to the Fire Brigade Union (FBU) but reflected findings that the leak did not originate from an official, consultant or from the Regional Management Boards.
An internal investigation showed that the version of the Outline Business Case (OBC) that was acquired by the FBU was the same as that circulated in confidence to Fire and Rescue Authority chairs. Forensic analysis showed that at some point between it being sent out to FRAs and the FBU placing it on their website it was electronically manipulated by a technically competent person. That analysis also showed that it was not leaked by anyone at headquarters.
John Mann: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what plans his Department has to offer training to local councils with regard to the high hedges provisions contained within the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2004. 
To assist local authorities in implementing Part 8 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003the high hedges legislationthe Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will be issuing detailed guidance, which will cover such matters as how to deal with complaints and
1 Mar 2005 : Column 1122W
will include model letters and forms. Additionally, we are planning to hold a number of regional workshops to which we will invite members of each local authority in England.
Phil Hope: The Regulations to implement Part 8 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003, which gives local authorities the powers to deal with complaints about high hedges, have not yet been laid before Parliament. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will not, therefore, be able to bring the legislation into force before Easter. We are, however, hoping to lay the Regulations before then.
Phil Hope: The number of members granted ill-health retirement from the Local Government Pension Scheme in England and Wales in the three years commencing 200102 were 9,805, 7,515 and 6,784 respectively. Information about the number of ill-health retirements granted by other public service pension schemes that operate within local government is not held by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
Keith Vaz: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list (a) projects and (b) organisations which have received EU Structural Funds in the East Midlands Objective 2 Programme, broken down by amount received. 
Mr. Raynsford: The information requested is available on the website of the Government office for the East Midlands. Full details of projects and organisations that have received European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) can be viewed at:
The information on the website details grant which has been approved and offered to individual projects and organisations. Requests for information on up to date payments made can be obtained from the Government Office for the East Midlands as follows:
Mr. Raynsford: In common with all other regions receiving EU Structural Funds under the Objective 2 Programme, the East Midlands completed a Mid Term Evaluation in October 2003 which assessed the performance of the Programme in its first four years and made recommendations to change its strategy over the second half of the programme. In addition, the programme is reviewed on an annual basis and the findings documented in an Annual Implementation Report. The 2003 Annual Implementation Report was completed in June 2004. Copies of the full report of the East Midlands Mid Term Evaluation and the Annual Implementation Report can be viewed at:
Further information on the Objective 2 Programme can be obtained from Peter Holmes, Head of European Finance, Performance and Policy Team at the Government Office for the East Midlandspholmes.firstname.lastname@example.org
Mr. Raynsford: Schedule 12 of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 gives designated organisations (the yes and no campaigns) the right to send a referendum address post free. The referendum addresses must be sent by the universal postal provider. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister therefore put in place a contract with the Royal Mail in summer 2004 to deliver these referendum addresses. The total cost was just under £500,000.
To ensure that the Royal Mail had complied with the contract and delivered the referendum addresses to a high standard, the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
1 Mar 2005 : Column 1124W
also had a small quality control contract with NOP. NOP contacted a sample of the electorate by telephone to ask whether they had received leaflets from the yes or no campaigns. To do this effectively, NOP had to describe the leaflets. Therefore officials in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister requested a copy of each campaign organisation's leaflet from the Electoral Commission and explained in full the reasons for doing so. Copies of these leaflets were not sent to Ministers or special advisers.
Mr. Edward Davey: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether centrally pooled capital receipts from the sale of council homes under the Right to Buy in debt-free authorities will be used as Approved Development Programme funding. 
Keith Hill: Pooled capital receipts from debt-free authorities do not form a dedicated funding stream into any particular grant or borrowing support regime, rather, the level of pooled capital receipts from debt-free authorities are taken account of when the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister is determining its level of investment in housing, including the Approved Development Programme.
Malcolm Bruce: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry pursuant to the answer of 3 February 2005, Official Report, column 1011W, on anti-bribery/corruption procedures, if she will make a statement on the conclusions reached following comparison of the revised Export Credits Guarantee Department anti-bribery and corruption procedures and those provided by G7 counterparts. 
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|