| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
25 July 2006 : Column 1352W—continued
Drug Deaths
Mr. Burstow: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer for how many deaths of people aged (a) under and (b) over 18 years in 2005 in (i) London and (ii) each London borough the use of (A) heroin/morphine, (B) ecstasy, (C) amphetamines, (D) other substances and (E) alcohol was recorded as the cause. [88961]
John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the national statistician, who has been asked to reply.
Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated 25 July 2006:
The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking for how many deaths of people (a) under and (b) over 18 years in 2005 in (i) London and (ii) each London borough the use of (A) heroin/morphine, (B) ecstasy, (C) amphetamines, (D) other substances and (E) alcohol was recorded as the cause. I am replying in her absence. (88961)
Information from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) on drug-related poisonings is extracted from a special database of these deaths. This database does not yet include deaths for 2005. Figures for 1997-2003 were provided in response to your similar question in October 2005.
Alcohol-related deaths for 2005 are available and figures for London and London boroughs are included in the table below. There were no alcohol-related deaths of people aged under 18.
Alcohol-related deaths were selected using the ONS definition of these deaths which is based on those causes most closely related to alcohol consumption. This definition has recently been revised and details of the changes are available via the National Statistics website: http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=1091
Economic and Fiscal Strategy Report
Mrs. Villiers: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will place in the Library the calculation underlying paragraphs 1.35 and 1.36 of HC 968, the Economic and Fiscal Strategy Report and Financial Statement and Budget Report, March 2006. [87531]
Dawn Primarolo: The figures in paragraphs 1.35 and 1.36 of HC 968, the Economic and Fiscal Strategy Report and Financial Statement and Budget Report, March 2006 were produced using micro-simulation models of the tax and benefit system and the 2003-04 Family Resources Survey (FRS).
It is not possible to provide the calculations that underpin the figures, as they are the result of complex models that cannot be reduced to a small number of calculations.
Economic Growth (Scotland)
Mr. Redwood: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment he has made of the reasons for the different rates of growth in Scotland and the rest of the UK since 1997. [88375]
Mr. Timms: Scotland has experienced sustained economic growth since 1997. The Government aim to promote economic prosperity in all countries and regions of the UK. In Scotland, the Government work in partnership with the Scottish Executive to promote this objective.
Electoral Registration
Chris Ruane: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the percentage electoral registration rate was for the 100 (a) richest and (b) poorest wards in (i) Wales, (ii) Scotland, (iii) England and (iv) Northern Ireland in the most recent year for which figures are available. [87731]
John Healey: The information requested falls within the responsibility of the National Statistician who has been asked to reply.
Letter from Stephen Penneck, dated 25 July 2006:
The National Statistician has been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question concerning the percentage electoral rate for the 100 (a) richest and (b) poorest wards in (i) Wales, (ii) Scotland, (iii) England and (iv) Northern Ireland, in the most recent year for which figures are available. I am replying in her absence. (87731)
The following tables containing percentage electoral registration rates are enclosed, and will also be placed in the House of Commons Library—Table 1 for the 100 richest wards in Wales, Table 2 for the 100 poorest wards in Wales, Table 3 for the 100 richest wards in England and Table 4 for the 100 poorest wards in England. Data for Scotland and Northern Ireland are not currently available.
Ward level income data have been used as a proxy for the richest and poorest wards. The income data used are the model-based Census Area Statistics (CAS) ward estimates for average household income for 200-02. The methodology used to produce the model-based estimates is relatively new and as a result may be subject to consultation, modification and further development. In view of this ongoing work the model-based estimates are classified as experimental statistics.
In common with any ranking based on estimates, care must be exercised in interpreting the ranking of the wards. The variability of the income estimates when using these figures needs to be taken into account. For example, due to some uncertainty over the accuracy of the estimates, it needs to be recognised that the income estimate for the highest ranked ward will lie among the group of wards with the highest income levels, but cannot with absolute certainty be considered to be the ward with the highest average ward income. Therefore the top and bottom 100 richest wards for England and Wales based on income levels cannot be considered to be a definitive list.
It should be borne in mind that the percentage of the “resident population” who are registered to vote does not provide a reliable estimate of the registration rate of the eligible population. This is mainly because there are definitional differences between “usually resident” and eligibility to vote and therefore the estimated resident population aged 18 and over is not the same as the number of people eligible to vote. For example, the resident population includes all those who usually live in an area irrespective of nationality whereas the parliamentary electorate excludes foreign nationals (but Commonwealth and Irish citizens are included) and may include some overseas electors who do not
currently live in the area. Further, there is inevitably some double counting of the registered electorate and this can occur for a number of reasons. People who have more than one address, including students, may register in more than one place. Electoral registration officers may vary in how quickly they remove people from the registers after they have moved away from an area or after they have died.
The latest available population data available at ward level are for mid-2002. The ward electorate counts used for calculating the electoral registration rates are for December 2002 parliamentary electors, including attainers. The parliamentary electorate has been used rather than the local government electorate even though the latter is definitionally closer to the resident population because the local government electorate is not available at ward level. No adjustment has been made to reflect the difference between these two time points.
The population data are estimates and as such are subject to a margin of confidence. The CAS ward level population estimates have been published with the status of experimental statistics. Therefore, the estimates, and electoral registration rates derived from them, should be treated with some care.
There are a number of wards where the electorate counts are greater than the 18+ population estimate, resulting in electoral registration rates above 100 per cent. These cases are attributable to definitional differences between the estimates and electoral counts, the accuracy of the ward estimates, the accuracy of the electoral registers and limitations in the methodology used to convert electoral counts to the CAS ward geography.
Electrical Items (Standby)
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the number of electrical items left on standby each night in his Department's buildings in London. [83584]
John Healey: No such estimate can be reliably made.
Energy Efficiency
Mrs. Villiers: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will make an assessment of how the wear and tear allowance might be reformed to incentivise landlords to invest in energy efficiency. [87455]
John Healey: The Government announced in pre-Budget report 2005 its intention to reform the existing Wear and Tear Allowance for landlords by making it conditional on the energy efficiency of the rental property. Any changes to the Allowance will be announced by the Chancellor within the Budget process.
Energy Services Market
Mrs. Villiers: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what report he has received on the Treasury-hosted seminar to explore how Government and business community can encourage the development of energy services markets; and if he will place a copy in the Library. [87452]
John Healey:
As the Energy Review states, the Government wishes to incentivise energy suppliers to engage more actively with customers in order to deliver greater energy efficiency in the home. We want to provide the right stimulus for them to develop new market opportunities to sell energy services, so what the consumer buys are services for heating, lighting and powering
their homes, in the most energy efficient way practicable. I hosted a seminar at HM Treasury with representatives of energy supply companies and other organisations, including non-governmental organisations and Government departments Outcomes of this meeting fed into the Energy Review consultation. A note of this meeting will be placed in the House Library as soon as possible.
Ethnic Minority Advisory Group
Mrs. Villiers: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer who the members are of the Treasury’s Ethnic Minority Advisory Group; and when it has met in each of the last three years. [87459]
John Healey: The Ethnic Minority Advisory Group (EMAG) is an internal group within the Treasury that works independently, but co-operatively, with Treasury senior management to ensure that all issues which affect the Treasury’s black and minority ethnic staff are taken into account in personnel and management policies, and to play a full part in the Department’s diversity agenda. The EMAG includes staff from across the Department, on a voluntary basis, and meets regularly as a group and with senior managers and other interested parties within the Treasury.
EU Emissions Trading Scheme
Chris Huhne: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will place in the Library a copy of the letter he sent to EU Finance Ministers earlier this year on the economic case for extending and strengthening the EU Emissions Trading Scheme beyond 2012 as the foundation of a global carbon market. [77147]
John Healey: The Chancellor wrote to EU Finance Ministers to highlight the economic case for extending and strengthening the EU Emissions Trading Scheme beyond 2012 as the core of a global carbon market. Developing the scheme is important in ensuring it maintains competitiveness for European firms and supports investment in low carbon technology in developing countries through the Clean Development Mechanism and in providing certainty for industry. The Chancellor enters into correspondence with EU colleagues on a number of issues, and these documents are not generally released.
Exports/Imports
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer by what percentage (a) exports and (b) imports changed between 1998 and 2004; and what assessment he has made of the connected trends in world trade over the same period. [87503]
John Healey:
IMF figures suggest that world trade growth averaged 6 per cent. per year between 1998 and 2004. Over the same period, total UK exports of goods and services grew by 26 per cent. (an annual average of 4.3 per cent.), while imports of goods and services increased by 41 per cent. (annual average growth of 6.8 per cent.). The divergence between UK export growth and world trade growth over this period is likely partly to reflect relatively weak growth in domestic demand in the UK’s main export market—the euro area—as well
as some loss of the UK’s share of world export markets in the face of increasing competition from emerging economies. However, UK export growth was at its strongest for five years in 2005, outpacing import growth.
Mr. Clifton-Brown: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer by what percentage (a) exports and (b) imports with European Union countries changed between 1998 and 2004; and what assessment he has made of such trends in trade over the same period. [87504]
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |