|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Table C: Social Rent units provided through S106 agreements with no central funding|
| Source: Returns from local authorities to the Department for Communities and Local Government (HSSA).|
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the time scale is for the introduction of choice-based lettings; what the results were of the pilot projects; and how she expects the policy to operate in rural areas, where there is a shortage of social housing. 
Meg Munn: The Government have set a target for all local authorities to operate choice-based lettings by 2010; and an interim target of 25 per cent. of local authorities by 2005. As at April 2005 some 27 per cent. of local authorities said that they offered choice-based lettings.
The report of the evaluation of the pilot schemes was published in May 2004, and showed that they were successful in achieving their aim of establishing more open systems that are seen to offer customers choice. They also did not appear to disadvantage vulnerable households, who continue to access a significant proportion of vacant properties and often bid successfully for the most popular, and led to improvements in housing management performance with, for example, re-let times reducing substantially in some areas.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what information facilities will be made available to ensure that tenants have knowledge of stock availability under the introduction of choice-based lettings. 
Yvette Cooper: Choice-based lettings schemes use a variety of media to advertise available vacancies, including websites, newspapers, free sheets, property shops and telephone services. Adverts will include brief details about the property and may include details about the area. In addition, schemes will usually publish feedback information for each advertised property that has been let, such as the number of bids received and the priority level of successful applicants, to help home seekers make judgments about which properties to bid for in future.
Mr. Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what the value was of each IT contract awarded by her Department and its predecessor was in each of the last five years; and who the contractor was in each case. 
Mr. Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government which IT contracts awarded by her Department in each of the last five years have been abandoned; and what the value was in each case. 
Meg Munn: Since May 2002 no strategically important IT contracts have been abandoned by the Department for Communities and Local Government. Information prior to the inception of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (May 2002) is not readily available.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government on what occasions an (a) individual and (b) organisation has applied for a judicial review of decisions of her Department in each year since 1997; and what the outcome was of each case where proceedings have been completed. 
Mr. Woolas [holding answer 20 July 2006]: My Department has a specific role in improving health in deprived areas through a range of policies and programmes which impact on the determinants of health. We have been supporting and investing in these areas since 2001, through the neighbourhood renewal fund. Local strategic partnerships are responsible for allocating these resources on local priorities to tackle inequalities, and most have prioritised specific funding to improve health, or funding aimed at tackling some of the wider determinants of ill health.
Ms Keeble: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much was spent on peer mentors for local authority members in (a) the second quarter of 2005-06, (b) the third quarter of 2005-06 and (c) the first quarter of 2006-07, broken down by local authority. 
Mr. Hands: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what guidance her Department has given local authorities on whether they should have a cabinet member with a specific public health brief. 
Simon Hughes: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what assessment her Department has made of the merits of integrating the delivery of street cleansing, waste collection, waste disposal and waste planning by local authorities; and if she will make a statement. 
DEFRA has not assessed in detail the merits of integrating these services. However, we are aware of a number of studies which show that where waste collection and waste disposal are split between two tiers of local government, there can be real benefits in authorities working together to deliver an integrated waste service. For example, a recent report by the Innovation Forum, a group of excellent rated authorities, highlights the benefits of joint working on waste in two-tier areas, citing possible efficiency savings of up to £150 million nationally.
Our consultation on the waste strategy review stresses the need for joint working between authorities, integrating strategy development and spatial planning. The Government are considering further how we can facilitate joint working by authorities.
Partnership working is one of the ways local authorities can realise the £300 million of efficiency savings identified in the Gershon review from waste and street cleansing during the period 2005 to 2008.
The Department for Communities and Local Government strategic partnering taskforce's final report, published in 2004, said that strategic partnerships are one of the main service delivery options available to local authorities in their quest for efficient and effective high quality services.
Mrs. Dorries: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government what discussions her Department and its predecessor has had within the last 12 months with (a) representatives of the board of Luton Town Football Club, (b) the chief executive of Luton Town Football Club, (c) representatives of Luton borough council, (d) representatives of South Bedfordshire district council, (e) representatives of Bedfordshire county council, (f) representatives of the East of England development agency and (g) representatives of the East of England regional assembly regarding the proposal to relocate Luton Town Football Club; what representations have been received from each; and if she will make a statement. 
Meg Munn [holding answer 24 July 2006]: The Department for Communities and Local Government and its predecessor have received no representations from the organisations identified in the question. Luton borough council, and neighbouring authorities, have briefed the Government office on the proposal but no advice was sought, nor any offered. As the application may be referred to the Secretary of State for her consideration, it would be inappropriate to comment on the merits of the proposal.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|