|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Francois: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the answer of 7 February 2007, Official Report, column 1032W, on ministerial visits, for what reason he will not publish the cost of the visit of the Economic Secretary to the Treasury to Israel and the Palestinian Territories on 19 and 20 December 2006; whether this information was recorded by the Department; and if he will make a statement. 
Paul Flynn: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the (a) highest and (b) lowest daily balance of the National Insurance Fund was in each of the last 10 financial years; and what percentage of the benefit payments for the year as estimated in the Government Actuarys report on the Up-rating Order in the previous year each figure represents. 
John Healey: The hon. Members 31 questions cover all the reviews listed on the Treasurys public website http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/independent_ Reviews/independent_reviews_index.cfm, going back to August 1999.
Independent reviewers are usually reimbursed for reasonable expenses incurred in the course of their work. Occasionally, where a reviewer is asked to undertake especially extensive work, remuneration can be provided. Since the beginning of 2005, the following have been paid fees, either by the Treasury or the Department jointly sponsoring the review:
Sir Michael Lyons
Professor Martin Cave
Sir Derek Morris
John Healey: 1,390 copies of the Leitch review final report were printed and 300 copies of the Leitch review executive summary were printed, including copies for both Houses of Parliament. Distribution figures are unavailable as these documents are distributed on demand and over the internet.
The cost of commissioning and developing, distribution and other media costs for the Leitch review were integrated in Treasury overheads and are therefore not available as a breakdown. The cost of publishing and printing, excluding internal staffing costs was £15,396.03.
Mr. Francois: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what the (a) commissioning and development, (b) publishing and printing, (c) distribution and (d) other media costs were for the Eddington transport study; 
John Healey: 1,143 copies each of the Eddington transport study main report, executive summary and research annex were printed, including copies for both Houses of Parliament. Distribution figures are unavailable as these documents are distributed on demand and over the internet.
The cost of commissioning and developing, distribution and other media costs for the Eddington
transport study were integrated in Treasury overheads and are therefore not available as a breakdown. The cost of publishing and printing, excluding internal staffing costs was £34,553.17.
Mr. Jim Cunningham: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the amount of VAT lost to the Treasury annually through UK companies selling CD and DVDs via the internet from the Channel Islands. 
Justine Greening: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs how many coroners there were in England and Wales in each year since 2001, broken down by district; and if she will make a statement. 
Justine Greening: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs what estimate her Department has made of the percentage of coroners inquests which are attended by a pathologist; and if she will make a statement. 
Ms Harman: In 2005the latest year for which information is availablea post mortem examination was conducted in 94 per cent. of cases where an inquest was held. The information we collect from coroners each year does not distinguish between those inquests where a pathologist was present to give evidence in person and those where the pathologist presented his evidence by means of a written witness statement.
Mr. Marsden: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs how many employees from her Department were asked to retire upon reaching 65 years of age as a result of the Department's mandatory retirement policy in each year since 1997. 
Ms Harman: The DCA retirement policy is flexible, and allows employees to retire at any point between 50 and 65. Employees who wish to work beyond the age of 65, are normally able to do so providing they are providing good service. Therefore this policy, effective from 1 April 2005, does not have a mandatory retirement age of 65.
Until 31 March 2005, the maximum retirement age for DCA employees was 65, and employment beyond 65 was for exceptional business needs only. The following table shows the number of employees who left DCA each year aged 65:
|Financial year||Number of employees who left DCA aged 65|
Bridget Prentice: The Service Voters' Registration Period Order 2006 extended the registration period of voters with a service qualification from one to three years as of 1 January 2007. The responsibility for promoting this method of registration amongst service voters is a matter for both the Electoral Commission and the Ministry of Defence.
Mr. Heald: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs what estimate she has made of the number of people prevented from voting in a polling station due to postal vote fraud in the 2006 local elections. 
Mr. Heald: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs whether her Department collects information from local authority returning officers on (a) irregularities with postal votes and (b) personation. 
Bridget Prentice: My Department does not routinely collect information on such allegations from local authority returning officers. We would expect information of this nature to be referred to the police as the proper investigating authority.
Mr. Heald: To ask the Minister of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs how many electoral petitions have been submitted since 1 January 2007, and what the details are of each case in respect of which no arrangements have been made for a court hearing. 
Bridget Prentice: The Government have taken significant steps in recent years to tighten up the security of the electoral process and assist the police and prosecutors in tackling electoral fraud. These measures are primarily established by the Electoral Administration Act 2006 and associated secondary legislation.
The new measures include: specific new offences of false registration and false application for a postal or proxy vote; strengthened offence of undue influence; new clear secrecy warnings on postal and proxy vote papers; increased time for police investigations; requiring reasons for a redirection of a postal vote; more time for administrators to consider postal vote applications; and requiring formal acknowledgement of the grant of a postal vote to be sent to an elector's qualifying registered address.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|