| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
5 Dec 2005 : Column 1043W—continued
St. Helena
Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development for what reason the costings have been removed from the publicly available version of the St. Helena Access Feasibility Study undertaken by Atkins. [34085]
Mr. Thomas:
Procurement of a suitably qualified contractor for the design, construction and operation of the airport on St. Helena is being taken forward through
5 Dec 2005 : Column 1044W
international competitive tendering. Making available the cost information contained in the Feasibility Study may prejudice the procurement process and compromise our ability to ensure value for money.
UN Central Emergency Response Fund
Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what representations he has made to governments from the (a) G8, (b) EU and (c) OPEC about the United Nations Central Emergency Response Fund; and what responses he has received. [34844]
Mr. Thomas: An expanded United Nations Emergency Revolving Fund (CERF) forms a key element of the wider package of reforms to the international humanitarian system currently under way. A resolution to establish the new CERF is currently under discussion in the UN General Assembly. The G8 Response to the Indian Ocean Disaster issued at Gleneagles 2005 welcomed the work being done on the CERF. The UK is the only G8 member to have made a pledge so far.
Under the UK presidency, the EU has issued statements at UN events such as the July meeting of the Economic and Social Council, and the World Summit in September, supporting the expanded CERF. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development, has continued to discuss this with EU ministerial colleagues. In addition, I addressed the EU Informal Humanitarian Aid Committee in October on the reform package. So far, contributions to the expanded CERF have been pledged by the UK ($70 million), Sweden ($40 million), the Netherlands ($12 million), Ireland ($12 million), and Luxembourg ($4 million).
In terms of representations to OPEC countries, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for International Development wrote to the Foreign Minister of Saudi Arabia in September, but to date no reply has been received. The UK plans to make representations to Indonesia.
Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development which countries have pledged funds to the United Nations Central Emergency Response Fund; and how much each has pledged. [34845]
Mr. Thomas: To date a total of $172 million has been pledged from seven countries, including the UK. The UK contribution is $70 million (£40 million), and we have undertaken to increase it by $1 for every $3 donated by others, up to a maximum UK contribution of $100 million. The other six countries that have agreed to contribute are Sweden ($40 million), Norway ($30 million over 2 years), the Netherlands ($12 million), Ireland ($12 million), Switzerland ($4 million), and Luxembourg ($4 million).
Uzbekistan
Mr. Hands: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what the circumstances were of the termination of aid projects in Uzbekistan in 2005; and if he will make a statement. [33476]
5 Dec 2005 : Column 1045W
Mr. Thomas: Immediately after the events in Andijan in May 2005, DFID suspended, and subsequently terminated, its support to a poverty statistics project being implemented jointly with the World Bank, which involved close co-operation with the central Government. DFID has since decided to end its bilateral programme with effectfrom March 2006 when our remaining bilateral project-working with the UnitedNations Development Programme and local government on a cross-border sustainable livelihoods programme with Tajikistan-comes to an end. Given the policies of the Uzbek government the potential impact on poverty reduction of our small bilateral programme is very limited.
We will continue to support the work of multilateral agencies in Uzbekistan, particularly the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD), the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank (ADB). The EBRD has agreed a new country strategy, limiting its assistance to the private sector. The World Bank and the ADB are in the process of revising their strategies. We are keeping closely in touch with them.
DFID's regional HIV/AIDS programme in Central Asia, working with the World Bank and other partners and based in the Kyrgyz Republic, will include a component in Uzbekistan, managed by a non-government agency. The programme has just begun, in the Kyrgyz Republic, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, and will run to 2008.
WORK AND PENSIONS
Benefits Office Closures
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many crisis loans were issued in (a) Vale of Clwyd constituency and (b) Denbighshire in each week of (i) the six-month period prior to the closure of the Rhyl Benefits Office and (ii) the period since closure. [34625]
Mr. Plaskitt: The available information is in the following table.
Notes:
1.Rhyl Social Security Office closed on 21 October 2005, but social fund applications were no longer processed there after 31 July 2005.
2.Data is not available by parliamentary constituency or local authority, but only by Jobcentre Plus district.
3.Vale of Clwyd parliamentary constituency and Denbighshire local authority are in Wrexham and North Wales Jobcentre Plus district.
4.Data is not available by week, but only by month.
5.Initial awards do not include awards made after review.
Source:
DWP Social Fund Policy, Budget and Management Information System.
5 Dec 2005 : Column 1046W
Child Maintenance
Mr. Holloway: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in Gravesham constituency are receiving maintenance via the Child Support Agency under the (a) old and (b) new scheme. [28373]
Mr. Plaskitt: The information is not available at constituency level.
Child Support Agency
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions in respect of how many parliamentary questions tabled by the hon. Member for Yeovil on the Child Support Agency since 5 May the answers drafted by staff of the Child Support Agency have been altered following advice, representations or comment by (a) Ministers, (b) special advisers and (c) civil servants; and if he will make a statement. [33434]
Mr. Plaskitt: Ministers, special advisors and civil servants in the Department, including the Child Support Agency, contribute to drafting and quality assuring parliamentary question responses. The final reply is then the responsibility of the Minister or chief executive as appropriate.
The specific information requested is not available.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what proportion of Child Support Agency staff have been working for the Agency for (a) less than one year and (b) less than two years; and if he will make a statement. [21856]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive, Mr. Stephen Geraghty. He will write to the hon. Member with the information requested.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 5 December 2005:
In reply to your Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of state promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what proportion of Child Support Agency staff have been working for the Agency for (a) less than one year and (b) less than two years; and if he will make a statement.
a) 8.16% of Child Support Agency staff (821.73 full-time equivalent) have been working for the Agency for less than one year.
b) 14.19% of Child Support Agency staff (1429.24 full-time equivalent) have been working for the Agency for less than 2years.
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) what assessment he has made of the impact of the failures of the new Child Support Agency computer system on the Government's ability to meet its poverty reduction targets; and if he will make a statement; [30020]
(2) what assessment he has made of the effect of delays in the transfer of old cases to the new system by the Child Support Agency on progress towards the Government's poverty targets. [30037]
5 Dec 2005 : Column 1047W
Mr. Plaskitt: The Child Support Agency contributes to the Government's wider target for the reduction of child poverty through a supporting target to increase the proportion of parents with care on income support and income-based jobseeker's allowance who receive maintenance for their children.
Achievement of this supporting target is dependent upon converting old scheme cases to the new scheme.
The Child Support Agency's chief executive, Stephen Geraghty, is currently undertaking a root and branch review of the Agency. He will report to Ministers and we will make announcements shortly.
Mr. Paul Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the average time taken to process compensation payments made to Child Support Agency clients for administrative errors was in 2004–05. [30031]
Mr. Plaskitt: The administration of the Child Support Agency is a matter for the chief executive. He will write to the hon. Member.
Letter from Stephen Geraghty, dated 5 December 2005:
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Chief Executive.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what the average time taken to process compensation payments made to Child Support Agency clients for administrative errors was in 2004–05.
Financial redress is made to clients in cases where maladministration has occurred. The Agency does not hold robust information to distinguish administrative errors from other acts of maladministration.
However, in the 2004/2005 financial year 80% of financial redress payments for maladministered cases were processed within 30 days.
Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what disability benefits and allowances are taken into account when calculating Child Support Agency maintenance payments under the (a) old and (b) new systems. [30866]
Mr. Plaskitt [holding answer 28 November 2005]: The old child support scheme takes fully into account as income payments of incapacity benefit, severe disablement allowance and certain elements of industrial injuries disablement benefit awards. War disablement pension, and any analogous payment made by another state, is taken into account apart from the first £10 a week.
Where a non-resident parent is entitled to a relevant benefit and would otherwise be required to pay the minimum amount of child support maintenance, their liability will instead be nil. The relevant disability benefits are incapacity benefit, attendance allowance, severe disablement allowance, disability living allowance and certain elements of industrial injuries disablement benefit.
The new child support scheme is more straightforward, the amount of a disability benefit or allowance is ignored in the calculation of a non-resident parent's income.
5 Dec 2005 : Column 1048W
Non-resident parents in receipt of a benefit generally pay child support maintenance at a flat-rate of £5 a week.
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the backlog of Child Support Agency claims made by claimants in Coventry South was in each month since January 2004. [33513]
Mr. Plaskitt: The information is not available at constituency level.
Mr. Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the national targets are for the Child Support Agency; and what the performance of relevant offices in Devon and Cornwall has been against those targets. [34033]
Mr. Plaskitt: I would refer the hon. Member to the Child Support Agency's 2005 Business Plan which is held in the House of Commons Library and details the Agency targets.
I am sorry to say that information requested on performance against targets is not available at constituency level.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |