|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Kemp: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) how many applications there have been for the new child trust fund nationally since its introduction; and how many children are eligible to receive it; 
(2) how many applications there have been for the new child trust fund (a) nationally and (b) in Houghton and Washington East constituency since its introduction; and how many children (i) in the UK and (ii) in that constituency are eligible to receive it. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis:
Children are eligible for the child trust fund if they were born on or after 1 September 2002, a child benefit award has been made for them and they live in the UK and are not subject to immigration restrictions.
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1829W
A CTF voucher is needed to open a child trust fund account and all eligible children receive one automatically once a child benefit award is made. No separate application is needed. So far around 1.7 million vouchers have been issued and I am encouraged by the fact that around one third of these vouchers have already been used and that awareness of the fund is virtually universal and many parents now see the child trust fund as the primary savings vehicle for their child. This positive action will help us to achieve our goal that every childregardless of their backgroundgets the best start in life.
Information on the number of CTF vouchers issued by parliamentary constituency is only available at disproportionate cost. However for information on the number of children born to mother resident in each UK constituency since 1 September 2002 I refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Battersea (Martin Linton) on 30 November 2004, Official Report, columns 8788W.
Mr. Ivan Lewis: Directive 2001/17/EC was implemented in the UK by the Insurers (Reorganisation and Winding-Up) Regulations 2004 for all insurance undertakings, apart from Lloyd's. Lloyd's unique structure did not prove readily compatible with the provisions of these regulations without further complex adaptation and refinement. Following consultation on draft regulations earlier this year, we intend to make the Insurers (Reorganisation and Winding-Up) (Lloyd's) Regulations 2005 using powers under section 2(2) of the European Communities Act.
The latest published information for GVA per head for England and the North East is for 2003. The Tees Valley is in the NUTS2 area of Tees Valley and Durham. Hartlepool is in the NUTS3 area of Hartlepool and Stockton-on-Tees, which is currently the lowest geographic level at which GVA per head is published. The latest published information for these two areas is for 2002.
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1830W
The estimates in the table are based on the regional Gross Value Added 1 (GVA) estimates published in December 2004. These are available on the National Statistics website at: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/StatBase/Product.asp?vlnk=7359
|Tees Valley and Durham||11,184|||
|Hartlepool and Stockton-on-Tees||12,019|||
Average earnings are estimated from the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings and are provided for employees on adult rates of pay whose pay was unaffected by absence during the pay period, by their place of work. This is the standard definition used for Annual Survey of Hours and Earning tables. The Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings does not collect data on the self employed and people who do unpaid work.
The Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, carried out in April of each year, is the most comprehensive source of earnings information in the United Kingdom. It has a one per cent sample of all employees.
|Beverley and Holderness|
John Healey: The Treasury has a strong record in adopting OGC policy and best practice initiatives and all the Department's Mission Critical, High and Medium Risk Projects are subject to OGC Gateway Reviews.
The purpose of the 'traffic light' system is to bring to the attention of the Senior Responsible Owner significant or urgent issues that need to be addressed, and any designation of 'red', 'amber' or 'green light' conveys no suggestion as to whether a project should be continued. Information on our projects will continue to be published.
20 Jul 2005 : Column 1832W
The Local Government Reorganisation (LGR) between 1995 and 1998 resulted in major changes to some county boundaries. Therefore data has been provided on both former and current county boundaries for later years to enable comparison over time.
|Year(52)||Former county||Milton Keynes UA||Current county||Former/Current county|
|Year(52)||Former/Current county||Former county||Southend UA||Thurrock UA||Current county|
|Year(52)||Former county||Medway UA||Current county|
|Year(52)||Former county||Bracknell Forest UA||West Berkshire UA||Reading UA||Slough UA||Windsor and Maidenhead UA||Wokingham UA|
As National Statistician I have been asked to reply to your question concerning the populations of (a) Stroud and (b) Gloucestershire in each of the last five years for which figures are available. (13616)
The most recent population estimates published are for mid-2003. (Estimates for mid-2004 will be published on 25 August 2005.) Therefore, the table below provides population estimates for Stroud and Gloucestershire for mid-1999 to mid-2003.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|