| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
7 Feb 2006 : Column 1135W—continued
Private Tutors
Charles Hendry: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what measures she is proposing to ensure the safety of children taught by private tutors. [45177]
7 Feb 2006 : Column 1136W
Ruth Kelly [holding answer 24 January 2006]: Where an individual is barred from working with children under section 142 of the Education Act 2002 on the grounds that he or she is unsuitable to work with children", it is a criminal offence to work or seek work in any position that includes training or being in sole charge of a child or children. A person guilty of this offence is liable, on summary conviction, to imprisonment for up to six months and/or a fine and, on indictment, to imprisonment for up to five years and/or a fine.
The Department would strongly advise parents to verify the credentials of any person employed to provide private tuition for a child, particularly if that person is likely to be alone with the child at any time. For example, parents could ask prospective tutors for references from a recent employer.
The Department is fully aware that parents currently have limited access to information. The new scheme to be implemented as part of the Bichard Inquiry Recommendations will allow parents to access relevant information on people they wish to employ as home tutors.
I made clear in my statement to the House on 12 January, we are committed to implementing Sir Michael Bichard's recommendations to tighten the system of vetting and barring people who wish to work with children and that will entail the ability for parents to check whether tutors, nannies, and other individuals whom they employ, are barred or disqualified.
School Attendance
Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills pursuant to the answer of 26 January 2006, Official Report, column 2286W, on fast track to attendance, if she will revise the 2003 guidance Ensuring School Attendance to include joint assessment and support working between Children's and Adult Services. [49300]
Jacqui Smith [holding answer 6 February 2006]: A general duty is placed on local authorities by section 17 of the Children Act 1989 to safeguard and promote the welfare of children under 18 who are in need by providing a range of services appropriate to meeting those needs. Assessments undertaken by local authorities of children should focus on the needs of the child, the capacity of the parents and wider environmental factors.
Ensuring Regular School Attendance: Guidance on the Legal Measures available to Secure Regular School Attendance" is a short document the purpose of which is to give an overview of the various legal measures available. This guidance refers to the importance of investigating the underlying causes of poor attendance and to joined-up working between agencies but it is not a suitable vehicle for setting out case working procedures in more detail.
My Department issued Effective Attendance advice last year to local authorities and to schools. It stressed the need for all parts of local authorities to be co-ordinated to identify and meet the needs of vulnerable children and families. It highlighted the need for schools to have support systems in place for vulnerable pupils, including young carers. It also emphasised multi-agency support meetings to agree appropriate action. In
7 Feb 2006 : Column 1137W
addition guidance (available since 1999) on Managing Behaviour and Attendance: Groups at Particular Risk" highlights the particular needs of young carers.
Truancy
John Bercow: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if she will list the 10 schools in each local education authority with the highest rates of truancy. [46380]
Jacqui Smith: The Department does not collect figures on truancy. However school level information on unauthorised 1 absence (of which truancy forms a part) can be found in the 2005 Achievement and Attainment Tables website, primary schools can be found at the following address: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/performancetables/primary_05.shtml and secondary schools at: http://www.dfes.gov.uk/performancetables/schools_05.shtml.
1 Unauthorised absence includes other forms of absence such as lateness, holidays during term time not authorised by the school, absence where reason is not yet established and truancy. Truancy forms only one part of the unauthorised figures.
DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER
Design for Manufacture
Mrs. Spelman: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to the answer of 9 January 2006, Official Report, column 253W, on Design for Manufacture, how many and what proportion of homes in each development will be sold at market rates; and how many will be available for (a) affordable rent and (b) shared equity. [47000]
Yvette Cooper: At this stage of the competition the actual numbers of affordable rent and shared equity homes that will be provided under Design for Manufacture are still subject to detailed negotiation between English Partnerships, developers and local authorities. Across the 10 sites it is anticipated that about 30 per cent. of all the homes will be affordable homes.
Provisional estimates of the total number of homes intended to be affordable on each site to date are listed as follows. However, English Partnerships are also in the process of negotiating the shared equity allocations, which may change these numbers:
Oxley Park, Milton Keynes, Phase 2 site, total number homes 145, of which 43 homes, or 30 per cent., will be affordable
Oxford Road, Former TA Centre, Aylesbury Vale, total number of homes 100, of which 30 homes, or 30 per cent., will be affordable
Upton, Northampton, Site D2, total number of homes 165, of which 36, or 22 per cent., will be affordable
Allerton Bywater Millennium Community, Leeds, Yorkshire, total homes 150, of which 30, or 20 per cent., will be affordable
Former Rowan High School site, Merton, London, total homes 210 of which up to 63, or 30 per cent., will be affordable (these figures update the estimated figures given to the hon. Member on 20 January 2006, Official Report, column 1689W
Former Renny Lodge Hospital, London Road, Newport Pagnell, Bucks, total homes 60, of which 20, or 33% per cent., will be affordable
Former Park Prewett Hospital, Kingsclere Rd, Basingstoke, total homes 137, of which 47, or 34 per cent., will be affordable
Former Linton Hospital site, Maidstone, total homes 123, of which 43, or 35 per cent., will be affordable.
Fire Services
Mrs. Spelman: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to his answer of 28 November 2005, Official Report, column 202W, on fire services, what assessment the Government have made of the expenditure by the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority on thefire control centre for London; and whether the Government made any additional payment to the Authority to finance the cost. [48159]
Jim Fitzpatrick: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has made no specific assessment of the expenditure by the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) on the current London regional fire control centre. The ODPM has received 10 year expenditure forecasts from all 46 fire and rescue authorities in England (including London) for the costs of operating their control centres, which informs the business case for the FiReControl project. No additional payments were made by ODPM to finance the costs of the current London control centre.
Housing Market Renewal Pathfinders
Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether it is his policy to encourage the housing market renewal pathfinders in England to form themselves into limited companies; and if he will make a statement. [44608]
Yvette Cooper: Housing market renewal pathfinders are non-statutory partnerships and it is for each partnership to decide the governance arrangements which are best for its circumstances. There is therefore a variety of governance arrangements for pathfinders with which the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has been content to enter into funding agreements. At present these include one company limited by guarantee, for Elevate East Lancashire.
Local Government Finance
Mrs. Spelman: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many full-time equivalent staff worked within section LGF 3G—Council Tax Revaluation and Balance of Funding Review Analysis Branch in each year since its creation. [48048]
Jim Fitzpatrick: Two full-time equivalent staff worked within section LGF 3G—Council Tax Revaluation and Balance of Funding Review Analysis Branch—from its creation in September 2003 until the conclusion of the Balance of Funding review.
Mrs. Spelman:
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister (1) what work his Department's Local Government Finance Working Group on Local Government Financial Statistics has conducted on council tax revaluation in (a) England and (b) Wales; [48050]
7 Feb 2006 : Column 1139W
(2) whether his Department has a Local Government Finance Working Group on Local Government Financial Statistics. [48155]
Mr. Woolas: The Working Group on Local Government Financial Statistics (WGLGFS) discussed council tax revaluation twice at recent meetings.
At the meeting held on 26 January 2005, a paper was presented by a representative of the Welsh Assembly Government on Revaluation of council tax in Wales".
At the meeting held on 20 July 2005 an oral report was presented on Data and timing issues associated with Council Tax revaluation and the Lyons Inquiry".
Papers and minutes of these meetings are published on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's website at:
Peter Luff: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what factors explain the reduction in the final financial settlement for 2006–07 to Worcestershire county council from the provisional figures; and what the percentage increase is between (a) 2005–06 and 2006–07 and (b) 2006–07 and 2007–08 for non-education services. [49657]
Mr. Woolas: There are a number of factors which explain the reduction of £19,692, or 0.03 per cent., in formula grant for Worcestershire county council between consultation and settlement. These are described briefly as follows:
(a) A 0.1 per cent. decrease in the 2005–06 Adjusted Local Education Authority Central Functions Formula Spending Share. This was due mainly to a downward revision of the control total for this service block which affected all relevant authorities. A smaller downward revision was also made to the teachers pay grant adjustment for Worcestershire.
(b) A further transfer of £12.269 million for the WEEE directive was added into the 2006–07 formula grant between Consultation and Settlement. In order to ensure a like-for-like comparison between 2005–06 and 2006–07, an adjustment of £11.974 million was made to the County-Level Environmental, Protective and Cultural Services Formula Spending Share in 2005–06. This led to a 0.3 per cent. increase for all authorities.
(c) A 0.1 per cent. decrease in the 2005–06 Adjusted Capital Financing Formula Spending Share due to a change in the methodology of adjusting for the Education SCE(R) programme which transferred to capital grant in 2006–07. The SCE(R)'s for Building Schools for the Future were excluded from this adjustment thereby increasing the 2005–06 Adjusted Capital Financing Formula Spending Share for those authorities that received a Building Schools for the Future SCE(R) in 2005–06, and decreasing the 2005–06 Adjusted Capital Financing Formula Spending Share for those authorities that did not receive a Building Schools for the Future SCE(R) in 2005–06, like Worcestershire.
The combined effect of the adjustments shown in (a) to (c) led to a decrease of £19,307 in the Adjusted Formula Grant for 2005–06.
(d) The number of pupils aged 3 to 18 increased by 7 pupils for Worcestershire between consultation and settlement due to the inclusion of pupils aged 16 and over on Form 8b. However as these had previously not been included for all authorities, this had a negligible effect on Worcestershire's Local Authority Central Education Functions Relative Need Formula.
(e) A further transfer of £12.269 million for the WEEE directive was added into formula grant. This increased all upper-tier authorities', including Worcestershire's, County-Level Environmental, Protective and Cultural Services Relative Needs Formula by approximately 0.3 per cent.
(f) A 0.2 per cent. decrease in Capital Financing Relative Needs Formula. At consultation, the Capital Finance Relative Needs Formula is calculated with provisional SCE(R) data and this is expected to change at settlement. Extra SCE(R)s were included in the calculation of the settlement that were not included at consultation. This results in a lower scaling factor for all authorities i.e. those authorities who see an increase in their SCE(R) allocation take a larger slice of the fixed control total so reducing the Capital Financing Relative Needs Formula for other authorities. Although Worcestershire did receive an increase in SCE(R) allocations at settlement, this increase was not enough to counter the reduction in Relative Needs Formula resulting from the reduced scaling factor.
(g) The changes to both the Adjusted 2005–06 Formula Grant and the 2006–07 Relative Needs Formulae, led in turn to changes in both the share of taxbase for authorities with education and personal social services responsibilities, and in the split between the Relative Needs Amount, the Relative Resource Amount and the Central Allocation blocks.
The combined effect of the changes shown in (d) to (g) led to a decrease in formula grant before floor damping of £10,880. The combined effect of the changes shown in (a) to (g) led to a decrease in formula grant after floor damping of £19,692.
In 2006–07 Worcestershire received an increase in Formula Grant of 3.8 per cent. on a like-for-like basis, after adjusting for changes in funding and function. However, we are also making Amending Reports for both 2004–05 and 2005–06 at the same time as the 2006–07 Settlement. Worcestershire's 2004–05 Amending Report Formula Grant was £1,007,385 less than the 2004–05 Settlement Formula Grant; Worcestershire's 2005–06 Amending Report Formula Grant was £196,583 less than the 2005–06 Settlement Formula Grant. Therefore the net change in Formula Grant for Worcestershire in 2006–07 is 2.0 per cent. Worcestershire is a floor authority: it receives £3,381,779 formula grant from the floor damping mechanism.
In 2007–08 Worcestershire received an increase in Formula Grant of 2.7 per cent. Again Worcestershire is a floor authority: it receives £2,958,439 formula grant from the floor damping mechanism.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |