| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
17 Jan 2006 : Column 1288W—continued
EU Documents
Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many and what proportion of EU documents have been classed as restricted and therefore not available to the European Scrutiny Committee in each year since 1997. [40944]
Mr. Douglas Alexander:
The Government does not keep figures on this issue. Documents subject to scrutiny by the European Scrutiny Committee are defined by the Committee's Standing Order, SO 143, and the vast majority are publicly available texts. In a very small number of cases, for example, negotiating mandates with third parties, the documents are classed as restricted. In these cases, the Government makes
17 Jan 2006 : Column 1289W
unclassified summaries of the decisions available to the European Scrutiny Committee and provides a full explanatory memorandum at the concluding stage.
EU Legislation
Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how many pieces and what proportion of EU legislation has been passed during periods when the House has been in recess in each year since 1997. [40945]
Mr. Douglas Alexander: There are periods during the year when the Council of Ministers meets but when Parliament is in recess. However, the Government works closely with the European Scrutiny Committee so that business is planned in a way which limits the occasions when legislation is agreed before the Committee has completed its scrutiny. There are, however, occasions when this is not possible. In the years since figures have been available, there were 20 occasions in 2003, and five in 2004.
Parliamentary figures show that in 2005 there were 68 occasions when the Council adopted uncleared proposals when the House was in recess. Figures for 2005 included 51 occasions when there were overrides when the House was in dissolution, and 17 occasions during summer recess. Final confirmed figures for the second half of the year will be provided by the Government to the European Scrutiny Committee in line with the commitment to provide twice-yearly reports on scrutiny overrides.
External Consultants
Mrs. Villiers: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how much his Department has paid since 2004 to external consultants who had previously been employed by the Department in any capacity within the previous five years. [41201]
Mr. Straw: To answer this question each transaction paid to a consultancy supplier, either in the UK or at posts, would need to be checked against the employment information of each individual contractor whose services the payment covered. This information could only be provided at disproportionate cost.
Scrutiny Reserve
Michael Gove: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will list the occasions on which the scrutiny reserve was overridden in (a) 2004 and (b) 2005; and what the reason was in each case. [40946]
Mr. Douglas Alexander: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 22 November 2005, Official Report, column 1900W about the number of occasions the Government has overridden the scrutiny reserve resolution since 1980. That answer provided statistics from 2001 until June 2005, the period for which figures were available.
Final figures for the last six months of 2005 are still being collated but preliminary information suggests a figure of about 36. Details of these occasions will be sent to the European Scrutiny Committee once the figures have been confirmed in line with the Government's
17 Jan 2006 : Column 1290W
commitment to provide the Committee with twice yearly reports on scrutiny overrides. Ministers override the scrutiny reserve resolution they account for their action in doing so by writing to the Chairman of the European Scrutiny Committee.
HEALTH
A and E Services
John Cummings: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what improvements have been made to the accident and emergency services in (a) the Sunderland Royal general hospital, (b) Hartlepool university hospital and (c) Durham university hospital since 2002; and if she will make a statement. [34064]
Mr. Byrne: As at September 2005, over 99 per cent, of patients spent less than four hours in the accident and emergency (A and E) departments of the County Durham and Darlington acute hospitals national health service trust and the North Tees and Hartlepool NHS.
Both NHS trusts have benefited from improvements to their A and E departments since 2002. Initiatives include:
a new discharge unit at the university hospital of North Durham to help smooth the discharge of patients from hospital;
a local primary care trust initiative to provide extra support to local nursing homes with high rates of A and E attendances;
additional staff recruitment for the A and E department at the university hospital of North Durham; extension of resuscitation facilities at the university hospital of Hartlepool;
provision of secure paediatric facilities at the university hospital of Hartlepool together with an increase in the number of staff with specific paediatric nursing qualification; and
additional patient monitoring equipment both for adults and children at the university hospital Hartlepool.
The information relating to the City Hospitals NHS Foundation Trusts is a matter for Monitor, the statutory name of which is the Independent Regulator of NHS Foundation Trusts. The Chairman of Monitor will write to my hon. Friend and a copy of his reply will be placed in the Library.
Administrative Costs
Stewart Hosie: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the total administration costs of her core Department were in the last period for which figures are available; and whether these are regarded as (a) identifiable and (b) non-identifiable for the purposes of public expenditure statistical analyses. [39831]
Mr. MacNeil: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the administrative costs were of each agency for which she has responsibility in the last year for which figures are available; what the total of such costs was in that year; and whether the costs are regarded for the purposes of public expenditure statistical analyses as (a) identifiable and (b) non-identifiable. [39847]
Angus Robertson:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health which functions of her core Department are carried out in (a) England and (b) London; and what administration costs were associated with these functions for each area in the last year. [39824]
17 Jan 2006 : Column 1291W
Mr. Salmond: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what the administrative costs were of each non-departmental public body for which she has responsibility in the last year for which figures are available; what the total of such costs was in that year; and whether the costs are regarded for the purposes of public expenditure statistical analyses as (a) identifiable and (b) non-identifiable. [40055]
Jane Kennedy: The administration budgets regime which HM Treasury oversee applies to Whitehall Departments only. The Department's non-departmental public bodies are not covered by this regime.
Information on the Department's administration costs, including the Department's executive agencies, is given in the Departmental Annual Report 2005 (Cm 6524, tables 8.1 and 8.2). The most recent Public Expenditure Outturn White Paper (Cm 6639) gives some provisional information on the 2004–05 outturn for departmental administration costs.
The latest information on gross expenditure of the Department's executive non-departmental public bodies for 2004–05 is given as follows:
The core Department's functions are all carried out within England. The Department operates from two main sites, in London and Leeds, and has smaller numbers of staff at a number of other sites within England.
All this expenditure is regarded as identifiable for the purposes of public expenditure statistical analyses.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |