|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Andrew Selous: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport for what reasons an appraisal summary table for a fully worked up lower cost alternative in relation to the Stoke Hammond and Linslade Western Bypass has not been provided since 1994. 
Charlotte Atkins: The Stoke Hammond and Linslade Western Bypass was subject to the Department's appraisal requirements applicable at the time when relevant funding and approval decisions were taken. These requirements have changed over time. Alternative options and routes were considered, but not recommended, by the Public Inquiry into the Compulsory Purchase Orders held in 2003. Once a scheme has completed its statutory processes, the Department does not generally require an assessment of alternative options when the local authority submits a request for Full Approval and release of funding under the Local Transport Programme.
Mr. Chope: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the policy of the Government is in relation to the legality of (a) fitting and (b) using television equipment in cars which operate while a vehicle is stationary at traffic lights. 
Mr. Jamieson: It is legal to fit television equipment in a motor vehicle. However, if the screen of the television can be seen by the driver then it is only lawful to display information about the state of the vehicle, or about the location of the vehicle and the road which it is on, or information to assist the driver to see the road adjacent to the vehicle, or to assist the driver to reach his destination.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the Highways Agency expenditure was in Hampshire in each of the last five years; and how much was spent on (a) new road schemes and (b) road maintenance. 
Delivery of the Highways Agency's road maintenance programme and smaller improvement schemes is carried out through a number of area-based managing agents. The area that includes Hampshire also includes other counties and it is not possible to identify how much has been spent in Hampshire alone.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer when the Government Actuary's Department will respond to the letter from the hon. Member for Yeovil of 20 December 2004 in relation to public sector redundancy packages; what the reasons are for the delay; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Timms: In response to the hon. Member's letter of 20 December 2004 the Government Actuary's Department provided advice to the Ministry of Defence in January, on the basis of which Ministry officials, given the unusual nature of the case, were given specific Treasury approval for a redundancy payment to the hon. Member's constituent. Treasury approval was initially given on 18 February but the payment was re-calculated to add interest at a standard rate in order to take full account of delay before payment was actioned on 7 March. Officials have already apologised to the constituent for the excessive time taken to settle this case but I believe that it has now reached a satisfactory conclusion.
Figures for England and Wales from 1993 to 2003 are published in Table 1.7 of the annual births reference volume (Birth statistics 2003 FM1 no 32). Table 1.7a contains means calculated from number of births. Table 1.7b contains means calculated from fertility rates, thus controlling for the age distribution of the female population, so providing a better measure of trend. Copies of the publication are available from the House of Commons library and is also available at: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/Product.asp?vlnk=5768&Pos=l&ColRank =l&Rank=256
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what the estimated effect upon revenue would be if the 10 per cent. band of income tax were increased by (a) £1,000, (b) £2,000 and (c) £3,000; 
(2) what the estimated effect upon revenue would be if the lower threshold for income tax were increased by (a) £1,000, (b) £2,000 and (c) £3,000; and how many taxpayers would no longer pay income tax in each case. 
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the estimated yield arising from levying income tax at a rate of 50 per cent. on all taxable incomes in excess of £50,000 per annum would be; and how many taxpayers would be affected. 
Dr. Pugh: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what percentage of migrant labour admitted to the UK was employed (a) by outsourcing companies, (b) by employment agencies, (c) by gangmasters, (d) in agriculture, (e) in catering and (f) in the care system in the last year for which figures are available. 
The attached table, using statistics from the ONS Labour Force Survey, gives estimates of numbers of people aged 16 and over who are resident and employed in the UK but whose nationality is other than UK. Estimates, for the three month period ending in November 2004 are given in total and for those employed by employment agencies, in agriculture, in catering and in the care system.
|Three months ending November 2004||Numbers in employment||Percentage(7)|
|Total non-UK nationals||1,532,000||100|
|The care system(5)||37,000||2.2|
|Of which those working for employment agencies(6)||3,000||0.2|
|Other non-UK nationals||1,428,000||93.2|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|