|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
19 Mar 2007 : Column 638Wcontinued
Mr. Andrew Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry if he will bring forward measures to require the average household charge on utility bills to reflect different sizes of dwellings and households. 
Malcolm Wicks: There is no average household charge for gas and electricity supply, and it is for individual suppliers to set tariffs. Customers' energy costs will reflect, among other things, the size of the dwelling and the number of residents, as well as the measures the customer has taken to reduce energy use by energy efficiency measures. Water supply is the responsibility of the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.
Mr. Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what the overall subsidies to the wind energy sector were for (a) Scotland, (b) England, (c) Wales and (d) Northern Ireland in each of the last five years. 
Malcolm Wicks: The Government's main instrument for supporting renewables in England and Wales is the Renewables Obligation (RO), in Scotland it is the RO Scotland (ROS) and in Northern Ireland, the Northern Ireland RO (NIRO).
The RO (ROS and NIRO) is a market-based support mechanism that requires licensed electricity suppliers to provide a specified and growing proportion of their electricity from eligible renewable sources. Wind farms are one of the technologies supported under the RO. This provides an assured market for renewable electricity and ensures that it attracts a premium.
The full details for the past five years RO support to wind energy by UK country could be calculated but at a disproportionate cost. However details for the past two years have been calculated. The figures used for this calculation are based on the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets' (Ofgem) calculation of a Renewable Obligation Certificate's worth to a supplier (the buy-out price avoided plus the recycled buy-out fund amount).
Aside from the RO, to date, the Government have committed £107 million in grant support towards the capital installation of offshore wind farm development. These offshore wind farms are all based off the coast of England.
Additional support for onshore wind has in the recent past been given under the clear skies scheme in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. The total for these projects was:
|(1) Scheme launch|
In Scotland, the Scottish Executive provide funding for the Scottish Community and Householder Renewables Initiative (SCHRI) which was launched in 2002. Under this scheme, grants are awarded to eligible householders or not-for-profit community groups for the installation of renewable technologies including micro-wind turbines. It is not possible to provide a breakdown of grant commitments by year. However, as of January 2007, SCHRI capital grants with a total value of £1.7 million have been allocated to 152 projects where wind is one of up to two technologies installed with the grant.
Tony Baldry: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his most recent estimate is of the (a) one-off cost and (b) recurring costs of implementing the Work at Height Regulations to (i) businesses and (ii) the regulators. 
Mrs. McGuire: One-off costs to businesses were estimated to be £222 million to £292.3 million and recurring costs £86 million to £154.2 million. One-off costs for regulators were estimated to be £0.9 million and recurring costs £0.4 million.
Although we cannot attribute all of the reduction in falls injuries directly to the Work at Height Regulations they will have had a substantial influence and the lower number of reportable injuries to workers in 2005-06 compared with 2004-05 has saved nearly £51 million.
The information in this reply was drawn from the final regulatory impact assessment for the legislation that is available in the Library or on the HSE website at:
The Government and the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) are committed to meeting the Better Regulation challenge. HSE is constantly reviewing what can be done better to ensure that people are protected at work while avoiding unnecessary burdens on business.
Mrs. Maria Miller: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions (1) how many staff he expects to transfer from the Child Support Agency to its replacement agency; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) what plans he has to transfer staff from the Child Support Agency to the Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission proposed in the White Paper A new system of child maintenance. 
Mr. Plaskitt: People working in the Child Support Agency at the point of transfer to the new Child Maintenance Enforcement Commission (C-MEC) will transfer with the full protection required by the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment) Regulations as specified by the Cabinet Office's statement of practice on staff transfers in the public sector. We will work closely with trade unions to develop plans for this transfer. Once the transfer is complete C-MEC will be responsible for making any future decisions on staffing levels.
Mr. Frank Field: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much was spent on employment zones in each year since 1998. 
Mr. Jim Murphy [holding answer 7 March 2007]: The information is in the following table.
|Employment Zone spend (£ million)|
1. Employment Zones started in April 2000 but prototype Employment Zones operated during 1998 and 1999 which accounts for the spend during those years.
2. Figures are rounded to the nearest million.
3. Information is up to March 2006.
Department for Work and Pensions Financial Division.
Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions with which organisations he has held discussions on the introduction of seasonal grants for families on low incomes. 
Mr. Plaskitt: Ministers in this Department have attended meetings on this and other related issues with a variety of organisations including Save the Children, the NSPCC, Barnados, One Parent Families, Child Poverty Action Group and End Child Poverty.
Mr. Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many adults have a national insurance number in the UK. 
Mr. Plaskitt: The total number of national insurance numbers in issue at 31 December 2006 was approximately 76 million. There are approximately 16.5 million national insurance numbers in issue where the person is deceased. These numbers are retained which means there are approximately 59.5 million in issue to adults, not all of whom will be resident in the United Kingdom.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much was spent on all new deal programmes in each year since 1996-97 in 2003-04 prices; how much he estimates will be spent in each of the next three years in 2003-04 prices; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Jim Murphy: The available information is in the following table.
|New deal expenditure at 2003-04 prices|
1. Factors used to calculate 2003-04 prices are taken from Treasury Gross Domestic Product deflators.
2. The earliest reported costs for new deal are for the financial year 1997-98 as the programme started in January 1998.
3. Figure for 2008-09 are not available.
Jobcentre Plus Financial Reporting and Control Team Notes:
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions why spending on new deal programmes for (a) 18 to 24-year-olds and (b) 25 year olds and over was reduced between 2004-05 and 2005-06; what budget has been set for 2006-07; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Jim Murphy: Between them, the mandatory new deal programmes have been successful in helping more than 965,000 people into work. New deal streamlining measures were announced in the Chancellor's 2003 budget statement. Spending on both new deal for young people and new deal 25-plus decreased partly because of these changes, which started in 2004-05 but were more fully implemented in 2005-06. The most substantial change was to reduce the minimum period of time participants would spend on the options stage of the programme from 26 to 13 weeks.
Evidence indicates that two thirds of all mandatory new deal job outcomes occur before the options stage, and most outcomes that do occur during options are achieved during the first 13 weeks. The programmes continue to ensure that participants who need additional help to get into work receive it, for example by spending more than 13 weeks on the options stage of the programme.
Budgeted expenditure for 2006-07 is £225 million for new deal for young people and £157 million for new deal 25-plus.
Mr. Laws: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much his Department spent on the new deal in each year since 2003-04; and what spending is planned in each year to 2009-10. 
Mr. Jim Murphy: The available information is in the following table. Figures for 2008-09 and 2009-10 are not available.
|New deal spend since 2003-04 (£ million)|
|(1) Actual spend|
(2) Budgeted spend.
(3) Planned spend.
1. Latest confirmed spend figures are to March 2006.
2. Figures include all new deal programme costs, staff costs, and allowances paid to participants, apart from the 50 plus element of the working tax credit, which is the responsibility of HMRC.
3. Figures are rounded to the nearest £ million.
DWP Financial Strategy Division, DWP Financial Control Division, DWP Information Directorate.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|