|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Susan Kramer: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the projected increase in rail passenger numbers is in (a) London, (b) South West London and (c) Richmond Park constituency over the next (i) five, (ii) 10 and (iii) 15 years. 
Mr. Tom Harris: The Department does not have a breakdown of projected passenger increases in the form requested by the hon. Member. The projected increase for passenger demand in the Southern Regional Planning Assessment area, which includes the areas mentioned, between 2002-03 and 2016 is 18.7 per cent.
Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the consequences to customers using (a) Portsmouth and Southsea and (b) Portsmouth Harbour railway stations of delays with the re-signalling project. 
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the average delay was for the One operated rail service between Romford Station and Liverpool Street Station was in each year since 2004. 
Mr. Tom Harris: Delay to train services is reported as Public Performance Measure (PPM), at an aggregate level for the Train Operating Company One, of which the Romford to Liverpool Street service is a part. The Department does not, therefore, hold specific delay information related to the Romford to Liverpool Street service.
Mr. Tom Harris: South West Trains have a fleet of around 1330 passenger carriages. The oldest are the Class 455 units, comprising 364 vehicles. They were built between 1980 and 1985 but have been going through a refurbishment which involves a major upgrading of the interiors including seating, lighting and accessibility improvements.
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many SPECS cameras were installed for evaluation purposes in each local authority area in
each year since 2003; and at what cost in each case. 
|Local authority||Date established||Location/site name|
Susan Kramer: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when a decision will be made on the future domestic use of the former Eurostar platforms at London Waterloo station; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Tom Harris: The Department is currently working with Network Rail and South West Trains to refine the options for the conversion of Waterloo International to accommodate domestic passenger services. This work is expected to be completed in the spring of this year.
Susan Kramer: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when the separate costing process for the former Eurostar platforms at London Waterloo station is expected to finish; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Tom Harris: The Department is currently working with Network Rail and the train operating company to refine the options for the conversion of Waterloo International to accommodate domestic passenger services. This work includes the costing of the options under consideration. This work is expected to be completed in the spring.
Norman Baker: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission whether the Refreshment Department has held discussions with (a) Sustain and (b) other outside organisations on the development of a procurement policy that supports sustainable food supplies and the consideration of food miles. 
Nick Harvey: The Director of Catering Services and the Refreshment Department Purchasing Manager met with Sustain in May 2005. Their Sustainable Food Chains briefing papers and Good Food on the Public Plate manual were disseminated to senior managers and a project was initiated to develop a sustainable food procurement strategy. Due to staff turnover, it has not been possible to take forward this work as originally intended, but the Director of Catering Services has remained in regular contact with Sustain, last meeting with their London Food Link Officer in November 2006. Following the recent appointment of a new Purchasing Manager and a new Executive Chef, it is intended that the project will be re-launched in 2007.
No meetings have been held with other external organisations specifically with regard to the development of a sustainable food procurement policy, but a meeting with the Chairman of Food from Britain is planned shortly.
Guidance has been obtained from various sources, including DEFRAs Public Sector Procurement Initiative, the European Commissions handbook Buying Green, the Marine Conservation Societys Good Fish Guide and relevant Farm Assurance Schemes. Further information has been downloaded from websites including Seafish, Fairtrade, the Soil Association, Greenpeace, etc. and key points communicated to buyers, chefs and other catering staff together with information provided by suppliers.
Norman Baker: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission what recent external audits the Commission has commissioned to determine whether spending decisions taken by the Commission represent good value for money. 
Nick Harvey: The Commission has appointed the Administration Estimate Audit Committee to oversee value for money issues on its behalf. The Audit Committee has reviewed a number of VFM audit reports from the Internal Review Service which works in partnership with PricewaterhouseCoopers. The most recently completed VFM studies were on agency staffing, the use of consultants and on cleaning services (phase II). The National Audit Office, the Houses external auditors, produced a VFM study of the covered walkway in Star Chamber Court that was considered by the Audit Committee in March 2006.
Mr. Laws: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission on which minuted occasions the Commission has discussed (a) the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and hon. Members correspondence and (b) the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill since 2005; and if he will make a statement. 
The Commission or the Members Estimate Committee has discussed the Freedom of Information Act on many occasions since 2005 but the
specific issue of Members correspondence with other public authorities has been considered in detail only once. There has been only one meeting since the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill was introduced on 19 December and this was discussed briefly at that meeting.
Mr. Laws: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission whether representatives from the Department of Constitutional Affairs have attended meetings of the House of Commons Commission in the last two years. 
Nick Harvey: No, but the Commission has given permission for House officials to discuss with DCA officials the guidance being prepared by the Department for public authorities responding to FOI requests involving Members correspondence.
Norman Baker: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission what steps he is taking to achieve a co-ordinated approach with the House of Lords to lessen the environmental footprint of the parliamentary estate. 
Both Houses have adopted an Energy and Water Saving Policy and a Waste Management Policy and are supportive of the implementation strategies contained therein.
The briefs for all works projects carried out for both Houses include energy efficiency requirements.
The current environmental awareness raising campaign is targeted at both Houses; invitations to the guest speaker presentations are sent to staff of both Houses and the exhibition during Energy Saving Week in October 2006 was held in both Commons and Lords buildings.
Energy efficiency training has been offered to staff of both Houses and members of the Energy Saving Group and the Waste Management Steering Group come from both Houses.
The data on energy and water consumptions and waste recycling reported in the Serjeant at Arms Monthly Management Report and in the House of Commons Board of Management Performance Information Quarterly Report are for the entire estate, Commons and Lords combined.
A report recommending the implementation of an environmental management system on the parliamentary estate has been approved by the Board of Management in the House of Commons and it will be presented to the House of Lords Management Board for approval soon.
Mr. Hoyle: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission what steps have been taken to oversee the implementation of the golden rules by the Refreshment Department; and who is responsible for that oversight. 
The five golden rules are specific to the Terrace Cafeteria and Members Tea Room.
Implementation is the collective responsibility of the staff, supervisors and line management working in those areas, but no formal steps are anticipated to be necessary for this day-to-day staff management task. Within the senior management of the Refreshment Department, the Catering Operations Manager holds specific responsibility for the delivery of the customer service improvement project and the Director of Catering Services is ultimately responsible for the maintenance of high standards of customer service throughout the Refreshment Department.
Mark Durkan: To ask the Solicitor-General whether he has had discussions with (a) the Prime Minister, (b) the Director of Public Prosecutions and (c) the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland on On the Runs since the withdrawal of the Northern Ireland (Offences) Bill. 
The Solicitor-General: Neither the Attorney-General nor I have discussed On the Runs with the Prime Minister. The Attorney-General has discussed the issue on a regular basis with the Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland as part of the routine process of superintendence. He regularly meets with the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland in respect of his duties as a Criminal Justice Minister in Northern Ireland and the subject of On the Runs has arisen on a number of occasions. I have engaged in some of those discussions.
The view of the Attorney-General has always been that the position of On the Runs can only be addressed by the prosecution process in a very limited way: by applying the usual test for prosecution to identify those cases where the evidential test is no longer met and, importantly, is no longer capable of being met. Given the serious nature of most of the offences concerned, the public interest is inevitably strongly in favour of prosecution. Political considerations play no part of that process.
Mark Durkan: To ask the Solicitor-General whether the Director of Public Prosecutions has received recommendations from the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland for criminal prosecutions under the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1988 in relation to her report into the murder of Raymond McCord junior and related matters. 
The Solicitor-General: Section 58(2) of the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998 requires the police ombudsman for Northern Ireland, where the ombudsman is of the view that an offence may have been committed by a member of the police force, to send a copy of the report to the Director of Public Prosecutions for Northern Ireland with such recommendations as appear to the ombudsman to be appropriate.
Recommendations as to prosecution are made by the investigating authority are received as, and treated as, confidential by the PPS. The responsibility of the Public Prosecution Service in every criminal case is to assess whether the evidence provided meets the test for prosecution. The PPS may also provide prosecutorial advice to investigators as to the evidence which may be required to prove particular criminal offences.
In respect of the police ombudsman's investigation into the murder of Raymond McCord junior and related matters, the ombudsman, both in the statement made under the Police (Northern Ireland) Act 1998, and in public statements made by her, indicated her view that her investigation had not resulted in there being sufficient evidence to prosecute any individual for any offence.
Martin Horwood: To ask the Solicitor-General how he interprets his superintendency role in relation to the Director of the Serious Fraud Office; and whether relevant written protocols are in place. 
The Solicitor-General: Under the Criminal Justice Act 1987, the Director of the Serious Fraud Office discharges his functions under the superintendence of the Attorney-General. The Director of the SFO has regular meetings with the Attorney-General to consider and discuss plans, policies and objectives for the SFO. In addition, the SFO briefs the Attorney-General about any case which is likely to involve issues which may be sensitive, complex or have wider importance. The Attorney-General and I are accountable in Parliament for issues concerning the SFO and the other prosecuting authorities we superintend. The SFO publish their annual report, setting out the progress they have made. The latest report can be viewed on the SFO website.
The Solicitor-General: Although there has been discussion about ongoing bribery investigations during routine meetings between the SFO and the Law Officers, no guidance has been given to the SFO on their conduct of bribery investigations.
The Solicitor-General: The Serious Fraud Office is the primary reporting authority for allegations of bribery of foreign public officials under the OECD Convention. The SFO assesses the allegations and after conducting research decides whether to investigate and, at a later stage, to prosecute.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|