|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
The March expenditure figure is substantially higher than that for other months due to a £10 million payment to the International Committee of the Red Cross for its 2005 Iraq Appeal. Variations in expenditure from month to month also reflect when invoices were received for completed work on different projects.
In addition, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) has continued expenditure in Iraq under its £30 million programme of quick impact projects (of which about £27 million has been spent since April 2003); and the
12 Jul 2005 : Column 1007W
Foreign and Commonwealth Office has made disbursements under the joint FCO/MoD/DFID financed Global Conflict Prevention Pool for Iraq (on which over £23 million has been spent since April 2003). Monthly breakdowns of this spending are not available.
The following table provides a breakdown of the UK's bilateral aid and imputed multilateral shares to Tanzania and Gambia since 1997. Figures are taken from the published statistics on International Development 1997/982003/04 and the DAC online database.
12 Jul 2005 : Column 1008W
|Bilateral aid||Total DFID programme|
|Imputed multilateral shares|
Mark Simmonds: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what discussions his Department has had with the Government of Sri Lanka regarding its decision to impose customs duty on vehicles brought into the country to assist tsunami aid work; and if he will make a statement. 
Lynne Featherstone: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how many cases of work-related stress have been reported in his Department in each of the last three years; how much compensation was paid to employees in each year; how many work days were lost due to work-related stress in each year; at what cost; what procedures have been put in place to reduce work-related stress; at what cost; and if he will make a statement. 
The figures quoted were those reported to DFID's Staff Welfare and Counselling Services, but because of the confidentiality guarantees given to staff, we cannot ascertain whether all of those who reported that they were suffering from work-related stress (or sought advice on their condition) were absent from work as a result.
DFID's electronic attendance management system does not differentiate between work-related stress and stress induced illnesses that may have been caused by other factors. Information on the number of working days lost as consequence of work-related stress could be made available only by incurring a disproportionate cost.
DFID recognises work-related stress as an occupational health and safety issue and is currently putting the Health and Safety Executive's Management
12 Jul 2005 : Column 1009W
Standards for handling work-related stress into practice. A comprehensive risk assessment was carried out in 2004 and we are currently working towards implementing an improved Stress Prevention Strategy.
The overall pattern of results is positive. For the organisation as a whole, commitment has been assessed as high; stress levels are considered low or normal in most areas, and reported risks to physical and psychological health are within the normal range.
DFID has a Stress Management Policy and a number of measures have been put in place to deal with work-related stress, including stress management training; an Employee Assistance Programme; a Counselling Service; flexible working arrangements and an Occupational Healthcare Scheme. The cost of the work undertaken to date is estimated at approximately £25,000.
Mr. Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what powers she has in relation to the admission arrangements of academies, with particular reference to Thomas Deacon Academy in Peterborough. 
Jacqui Smith: Admissions arrangements for academies are agreed with the Secretary of State as a condition for the Funding Agreement, following local consultation. They are consistent with the School Admissions code of Practice and have to be fair, open and transparent. Academies also take part in local admissions forums and are also required by law to cater for children of all abilities.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the extent of adult illiteracy in England is; what criteria she uses to assess illiteracy; and if she will make a statement. 
Bill Rammell: The Skills for Life Survey: A national needs and impact survey of literacy, numeracy and ICT skills" (DfES, October 2003) provides the latest estimates of literacy levels across England. The survey assessed the literacy, numeracy and ICT skills of around 8,000 adults aged 16 and above in England.
The survey findings are shown in the following tables. The assessment levels correspond to the literacy and numeracy national standards: these were introduced in 2002 to provide a framework for all adult screening tests, diagnostic tools, programmes of study and qualifications. Learners are assessed for levels of literacy from entry level 1 to level 2. Level 2 is broadly equivalent to a higher grade GCSE (A*-C).
|16 to 65-year-olds|
|Entry level 1 or below||3||1.1|
|Entry level 2||2||0.6|
|Entry level 3||11||3.5|
|(All entry level or below)||(16)||(5.2)|
|Level 2 or above||44||14.1|
|16 to 65-year-olds|
|Entry level 1 or below||5||1.7|
|Entry level 2||16||5.1|
|Entry level 3||25||8.1|
|(All entry level or below)||(47)||(15.0)|
|Level 2 or above||25||8.1|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|