|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
|Half days missed per pupil in maintained primary and secondary schools( 1) in Lancashire local authority|
|Primary schools||Secondary schools|
|Unauthorised absence||Unauthorised absence|
|Local authority||Number of day pupils of compulsory school age||Number of pupils absent||Average number of half days missed||Number of day pupils of compulsory school age||Number of pupils absent||Average number of half days missed|
|(1 )Includes middle schools as deemed.|
Data are not yet available on the number of times any one individual is absent. Pupil level absence data were collected for the first time via the School Census in January and will be published in March 2007.
Unauthorised absence is absence without leave from a teacher or other authorised representative of the school. This includes all unexplained or unjustified absences, such as lateness, holidays during term time
not authorised by the school, absence where reason is not yet established and truancy.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for Education and Skills how many and what percentage of (a) 16, (b) 17 and (c) 18-year-olds were in (i) full-time education, (ii) full-time training, (iii) employment and (iv) none of the above in (A) 1995, (B) 2000, (C) 2005 and (D) the last year for which figures are available, broken down by local education authority. 
The table, which has been placed in the Library, gives the number and percentage of (a) 16-year-olds and (b) 17-year-olds who were in (i) Full-time education, (ii) Work-based learning and (iii) Total in Education and Work-based learning in (A) 1995, (B) 2000 and (C) 2004.
There is no information available on a comparable basis at the local authority level on the participation of 18-year-olds or the number of young people in employment. 2004 is the latest year for which data are available. The figures refer to young people resident in the local authority at the end of the year.
Mr. Straw: Staff based in the Office of the Leader of the House of Commons are regularly reminded of the dangers of identity fraud through intranet bulletins and current security policies. All confidential waste within the Office is shredded to avoid any security risks.
Mr. Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport which members of the Casino Advisory Panel were appointed because of their experience in assessing the regenerative impact of a regional casino. 
Tessa Jowell [holding answer 26 March 2007]: The skills and experience required by the Chair and members of the Casino Advisory Panel were set out in the role specification that formed part of the recruitment pack. Ministers were seeking people with skills and experience at a senior, strategic level in one or more of the following areas:
the local or regional planning system;
regeneration of disadvantaged areas;
the leisure and tourism industries;
the evaluation of economic change and its social impact.
Biographical details of the five individuals selected to become the Chair and members of the Casino Advisory Panel were included in the press release, issued on 30 September 2005, which announced the establishment of the panel.
The press release is available on the Panels website at www.culture.gov.uk/cap. Copies have been placed in the House Library.
Mr. Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the implementation of the Casino Advisory Panels guidance issued to the participants in the Examinations in Public. 
Prior to the hearing, interested parties, including the local authorities that bid for the regional casino licences, were invited to submit written evidence to the Committee. It was clear from the evidence submitted that some parties were concerned about some aspects of the EiPs but that many others were satisfied that the Panel had conducted the examinations in a fair and open manner.
Mr. Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what discussions the Casino Advisory Panel had with Government departments other than her Department on the definition of regeneration benefits in drawing up its report. 
Tessa Jowell [holding answer 27 March 2007]: The Casino Advisory Panel was set up to operate entirely independently of the Government. The manner in which it carried out its work, within its agreed terms of reference and remit, was entirely a matter for the panel.
The panel drew on a large amount of material and evidence in preparing its report. In chapters 4 and 5 of its report, the panel considered regeneration issues and took account of the Department for Communities and Local Governments indices of multiple deprivation.
Mr. Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what discussions there have been between the Casino Advisory Panels Chairman and her Department on how the panel reached its definition of social impact since the publication of the panels report on 30 January. 
Tessa Jowell [holding answer 27 March 2007]: There has been no discussion between the Department and the chairman of the Casino Advisory Panel on this topic since the publication of the panels report on 30 January.
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what briefing on (a) social impact and (b) regeneration officials in her Department gave to the Chair of the Casino Advisory Panel prior to his appearance before the House of
Lords Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee on 13 March. 
Tessa Jowell [holding answer 27 March 2007]: DCMS officials did not provide Professor Crow, Chairman of the Casino Advisory Panel, with briefing on any topic prior to his appearance before the House of Lords Merits of Statutory Instruments Committee on 13 March.
Mr. Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport how much her Department spent on (a) sponsoring newspaper or publication supplements and (b) funding advertorials in newspapers or publications in the last year for which figures are available; and what the topic of each was. 
deployment of multifunctional devices for printing and copying that default to double sided output;
staff are instructed to read on screen rather than print emails and documents unnecessarily;
internal publications, instructions and manuals are issued online through the Department's intranet;
the Department uses recycled paper; and,
the Department uses electronic tendering solutions to reduce the amount of paper work and postage created through the use of manual systems.
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer of 18 December 2006, Official Report, column 1596W, on digital switchover, if she will break down by category of eligibility the estimate of the number of Whitehaven households entitled to targeted assistance. 
1. Totals rounded to the nearest hundred. The figures are based on information from the whole Copeland constituency rather than the Whitehaven transmitter coverage area (which covers about 90 per cent. of households in the Copeland constituency)
2. Eligibility for help from the digital switchover help scheme will be by benefit unit rather than the whole household definition used by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) the Scottish Executive, the Welsh Assembly Government and the Northern Ireland Office to forecast future household growth.
3. The definition of a benefit unit is a couple and any dependent children. It excludes adults deemed to be non-dependents who, if eligible, will be able to claim assistance from the help scheme in their own right.
Mr. Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what assessment she has made of whether there was a variance between the Casino Advisory Panels definition of social impact and the Gambling Acts objective of reducing problem gambling, as referred to in the conclusions of the 13(th) Report of the House of Lords Select Committee on the Merits of Statutory Instruments, Drawing special attention to the Draft Gambling (Geographical Distribution of Casino Premises Licences) Order 2007. 
Tessa Jowell [holding answer 26 March 2007]: I wrote to the Lord Filkin, Chairman of the Merits Committee, on 21 March to clarify, among other matters, the remit of the Casino Advisory Panel with regard to social impact. In my letter I said:
One of the most fundamental arguments made by the Committee, and one which runs throughout the report, is that the Casino Advisory Panel should have placed greater emphasis on the minimisation of harm from gambling. I should explain that this was not the primary consideration we set for the Panel.
The criteria against which the Panel would assess submissions were set out in the Governments national policy statement on casinos, published on 16 December 2004, which makes reference to the protection of children and vulnerable people. In paragraph 10 of its report, the Panel noted that the Department had asked it to have due regard to the national policy statement.
The Panels primary consideration was to ensure that the locations provide the best possible test of social impact. Subject to this, the criteria were also:
to include areas in need of regeneration (as measured by employment and other social deprivation data)
to ensure that those areas selected are willing to licence a new casino.
I did not ask the Panel to make final recommendations based exclusively on the minimisation of harm from gambling. This is because it is the role of the Gambling Commission to monitor and minimise any harm that might arise from new casino gambling. It was the job of the Casino Advisory Panel to select locations that are best able to be monitored rigorously. I am satisfied that is exactly what they have done.
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport what recent discussions her Department has had with HM Treasury on the level of Exchequer funding spent on tackling problem gambling; and if she will make a statement. 
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|