|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mark Hunter: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills if he will take steps to ensure that the pay dispute involving university academic staff does not have an adverse impact on students. 
Bill Rammell: It is a matter for higher education institutions (HEIs) to consider how best they can minimise the adverse effects on students of the current dispute, including making contingency arrangements for examinations and other assessments. HEIs, as autonomous bodies, are responsible for determining their own academic and administrative affairs, including deciding what to pay their own staff. Pay and conditions of service are subject to negotiations between employers, their staff and their representative trade union bodies. The Government plays no part in this.
While this is a matter for unions and employers, I am disappointed that this has come to industrial action and that students progress is being threatened by this dispute. The employers have made an offer of 12.6 per cent. over three years, which I believe the academic unions should now formally put to their members with a view to ending this damaging dispute.
Alan Johnson: The 2006 Departmental Annual Report (Cm 6812) published on 16 May shows an estimated outturn of £30,342 million for programmes
lying within the Departmental Expenditure Limit. This gives an overall underspend of £468 millionapproximately 1.5 per cent. of the Departments budget. The majority of the underspend relates to capital programmes where resource has been committed to local authorities, schools and others but will not now be spent until 2006-07. Final figures for the year will be published in the Public Expenditure Outturn White Paper in July.
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills what the incidence of reported violence towards (a) staff and (b) pupils was in the 100 (i) primary and (ii) secondary schools with the (A) highest and (B) lowest percentage of children receiving free school meals in each of the last three years. 
Bill Rammell: Further and higher education institutions are self-governing independent bodies. Each institution is responsible for its own arrangements to widen participation and to facilitate their students access to learning. Most institutions provide a range of student services for existing students who need particular help.
Carers may also be eligible for financial support from further and higher education establishments. Awards from the Learner Support Fund are made by further education colleges on the basis of individual need, using locally defined criteria. For students in higher education, the Access to Learning Fund, a non- repayable discretionary fund, covers students with caring responsibilities. Information on the extent to which young carers have benefited from these funds is not collected at national level.
The Deputy Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Rugby and Kenilworth (Jeremy Wright) on 17 May 2006, Official Report, column 983W. These administrative support arrangements are still being finalised.
Mr. Arbuthnot: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether his responsibilities as Deputy Prime Minister give rise to a budget for (a) entertainment and (b) travel; and if he will make a statement. 
The Deputy Prime Minister [holding answer 11 May 2006]: I shall continue to receive a budget in the usual way to enable me to carry out the role that my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has asked me to fulfil.
Mr. Hollobone: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to the answer of 17 May 2006, Official Report, column 983W, on ministerial responsibilities, what the forecast total annual cost to the public purse is of the execution of his duties and responsibilities for each of the next three years. 
Mr. Iain Wright: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to the answer of 24 March 2006, Official Report, column 924W, on anhydrite mines, how many bids there were for funding in the current round of the Land Stabilisation Programme; what the total amount
was of such bids; and what the total value is of the Land Stabilisation Programme. 
The current Land Stabilisation Programme budget is £236 million, which encompasses expenditure since the start of the Programme in 1999 and funding already committed and forecast to the end of the Programme in 2011.
Yvette Cooper: Areas of Great Landscape Value are local designations established by local authorities. Government policy on such designations is set out in Planning Policy Statement 7 (PPS7) Sustainable Development in Rural Areas (2004). While recognising the value of local landscapes, the Government believe that carefully drafted criteria-based policies in development plans provide sufficient protection for such areas without the need for rigid local designations that may unduly restrict acceptable sustainable development and economic activity that underpins the vitality of rural areas. Such designations should therefore only be maintained, or, exceptionally, extended where it can clearly shown that criteria-based policies cannot provide the necessary protection. PPS7 indicates that the Government expect planning authorities to consider rigorously the justification for retaining such designations when preparing local development documents, and to ensure that such designations are based on a formal and robust assessment of the qualities of the landscape concerned.
Greg Clark: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister (1) what the statistical basis is of the estimates given in the statements on brownfield development attributed to a spokesman from his Department in The Daily Telegraph on 22 April 2006; 
The estimates given in the statement were based on information from Land Use Change Statistics (LUCS). The latest LUCS show that in 2004, 72 per cent. of new dwellings, including conversions, were built on brownfield land (technically known as previously-developed land). Claims that two-thirds of new dwellings built on brownfield land are on gardens are contradicted by the statistics in LUCS.
Of the dwellings built on brownfield land in 2004,22 per cent. were on land that was previously used for residential purposes (which includes buildings and the land associated with those buildings). This is 15 per cent. of all new dwellings built.
There are no statistics on how much of this residential previously-developed land comprises the footprint of the previous homes on the site and how much is the surrounding area. Nor are there detailed statistics on what area of the land is covered by new buildings and what is surrounding open space and garden. It is therefore incorrect to suggest that even15 per cent. of new homes are built on gardens.
Information relating to the percentages of new dwellings, including conversions, built on all brownfield land and on land that was previously used for residential purposes is set out in the following table for 1986 onwards.
|New dwellings on previously developed land as a proportion of all new dwellings, including conversions||New dwellings on previously residential land as a proportion of all on previously- developed land||New dwellings on previously residential land as a proportion of all new dwellings|
The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has made no assessment of future trends in the number of planning applications for new casinos under the Gambling Act 2005. However, the Gambling Act permits only one regional, eight large and eight small casinos. The independent Casino Advisory Panel will recommend the areas where the 17 new casinos permitted by the Act should be located.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|