|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Headcount related costs includes the costs of permanent salaries, casual and temporary staff, superannuation costs and overtime. Non Headcount related cost includes office costs, utilities, telephone costs and the cost of training programmes e.g. New Deal.
The capital figures exclude the cost of Jobcentre Plus Rollout (refurbishment and acquisitions) which is met from a centrally managed national programme budget.
During the period since Jobcentre Plus was created London region has undergone major restructuring to move from one region covering London and South East to two regions. The number of districts in the region has also reduced from 30 to 9. This reorganisation makes comparison of expenditure between years difficult. The continued centralisation of benefit processing has reduced costs directly held in regions over the period.
The 2005-06 figures have not been finalised and may be subject to change following the annual audit.
The Secretary of State has asked me to reply to your question about the costs of maintaining the Jobcentre Plus website in each year since its creation. This is something which falls within the responsibilities delegated to me as chief executive of Jobcentre Plus.
The information you have requested is in the table.
|Total maintenance costs|
I hope this is helpful.
Mr. Frank Field:
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people have started on
the Pathways to Work scheme in each pilot district since the scheme's introduction. 
|Individuals starting Pathways to Work, by district|
1. Data is to the end of October 2005. 2. All figures have been rounded to the nearest 10. 3. As requested the answer is based on the number of individuals who have started Pathways to Work. The total number of Pathways starts is higher as an individual can have multiple spells on Pathways. 4. The first three Pathways to Work pilots (Bridgend, Rhondda, Cynon and Taf; Renfrewshire, Inverclyde, Argyll and Bute; Derbyshire) commenced on 27 October 2003. The four pilots in the second phase of Pathways to Work (Gateshead and South Tyneside; East Lancashire; Essex; Somerset) commenced on 5 April 2004.
Source: Pathways to Work Evaluation Database.
Mr. Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what assessment she has made of the impact on tenant (a) rents and (b) satisfaction with their accommodation of the transfer of housing stock to arm's length management organisations. 
Yvette Cooper: Local authorities do not transfer their housing stock to arms length management organisations (ALMOs). The stock and the ALMO remain wholly owned by the local authorities. ALMOs are set up by local authorities to manage all or part of their housing stock.
There is no direct impact on rents when an ALMO is set up as the power to set rents remains with the local authority. The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) issues rent setting guidance to all local authorities, whether or not they have an ALMO, on the rent restructuring rules. Rent restructuring will result in actual and assumed rents converging over time.
Mr. Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much funding will be made available for the next round of transfers to arm's length management organisations. 
The ALMO (Arms Length Management Organisation) programme has received a
budget of £3.7 billion under the two most recent spending reviews for the five years up to 2007-08. £3.3 billion of this has been allocated to existing ALMOs. Spend in 2007-08 by any ALMOs that apply for the next round, along with further allocations for continuing ALMOs, will be met from the remaining provision. Funding for ALMOs beyond 2007-08 will be considered in the context of the Comprehensive Spending Review.
Mr. Spellar: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if his Department will investigate the management of the Metropolitan Housing Trust following the discovery of the remains of Carol Vincent in one of the Trust's properties. 
The Housing Corporation is the independent regulator for registered social landlords (RSLs) such as MHT. Its assessment is that no mismanagement has occurred on the behalf of MHT in relation to the case of Carol Vincent. However, I understand that MHT is reviewing its procedures to consider what checks it could or should carry out to try to ensure it has contact with those residents who, though not vulnerable and not in contact with the association because of any repair or maintenance issue, do not contact the association for a significant period of time.
Anne Milton: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much was spent on compulsory land purchases in (a) Guildford constituency, (b) Surrey and (c) England in 2005-06. 
Sir Michael Spicer: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government when the Minister of State will reply to the hon. Member for West Worcestershires letter of 24 April, about council tax on secondary homes. 
Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how many and what proportion of properties in each council tax collecting local authority area were recorded as being entitled to second home council tax relief in (a) 1995, (b) 2000, (c) 2005 and (d) 2006. 
A table detailing the information for 2005 has been made available in the Library of the House. The table gives, for each billing authority, both the number of second homes in the local authority area and the number of second homes as a proportion of the housing stock in the area. The data are from a snapshot taken in October 2005, as recorded on CTB1 forms submitted by each local authority.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if she will list those (a) Acts and (b) parts of Acts which received Royal Assent between 1976 and 2006 for which her Department has policy responsibility and which remain in force. 
Angela E. Smith: I refer the hon. Member to the answers I gave to the hon. Members for Brentwood and Ongar (Mr. Pickles) and North Cornwall (Mr. Rogerson) on 17 May 2006, Official Report, column 989W and to the hon. Member for Ryedale (Mr. Greenway) on 18 May 2006, Official Report, column 990W.
Mr. Jenkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government if she will list the local authority wards in (a) Tamworth constituency and (b) Staffordshire which are in the top 30 per cent. of wards in England by multiple deprivation indicators; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Woolas: The following table lists the super output areas (SOAs) in Tamworth constituency and Staffordshire that fall within the 30 per cent. most deprived SOAs in England. The most deprived SOA in the area is located in Newcastle-under-Lyme.
|SOA code||Parliamentary constituency||Rank of IMD where1 = most deprived|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|