|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Lady Hermon: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many school playing fields there were in each education and library board area in Northern Ireland in each year since 1997. 
Maria Eagle: The Education and Library Boards have provided the following information for the number of playing fields at controlled and maintained schools. Information relating to voluntary grammar, grant-maintained integrated and Irish medium schools is not readily available.
Kate Hoey: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how much has been spent on the Maze stadium project to date; how much has been spent on (a) scoping, (b) feasibility and (c) promotion of the Maze stadium project; how much will be spent in total on site clearance; which Departments approved this expenditure; and whether such expenditure came from within existing departmental expenditure limits. 
Mr. Hanson: To date Government and the Strategic Investment Board (SIB) have spent £916,855.38 on the proposed multi-sports stadium project at the Maze/Long Kesh. These costs include £124,727.53 on business planning which incorporate both (a) scoping and (b)feasibility. From 2004 to the end of this financial year, the Office of First and Deputy First Minister (OFMDFM) will have spent some £2.9 million on site clearance, demolition, and decontamination to prepare the Maze/Long Kesh regeneration site for redevelopment. No costs have been incurred on promotion of the stadium. These expenditures were approved by the Department of Culture Arts and Leisure (DCAL) and OFMDFM and are within their existing departmental expenditure limits.
Kate Hoey: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what evaluation was made of the financial feasibility of the Maze stadium project; and if he will place in the Library the report of such evaluation. 
Mr. Hanson: A viability assessment of a shared future multi-sports stadium for Northern Ireland was completed in May 2004. This concluded that the stadium could be operationally viable provided initial capital costs are met and the three sports bodies (Soccer, Rugby and Gaelic) agree to participate.
Kate Hoey: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland whether a study was undertaken to assess the viability of alternative sites to the Maze for a regional multi-purpose sports stadium. 
Mr. Hanson: A site selection evaluation exercise carried out in 2004 considered the viability of 12 sites for a shared future multi-sports stadium for Northern Ireland. Following this process, three sites were shortlisted for further, more detailed assessment. On the basis of this, two of the three remaining sites were ruled out on cost and acceptability grounds. This was announced in a press release in March 2005.
Mr. McGrady: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland if he will take steps to implement the recommendations of (a) the Sure Start funding bid and (b) the South Down Family Health Initiative findings. 
(a) The expansion of Sure Start is underway. Seven new projects have been created and 19 existing projects have expanded their catchment areas. Most expansions are operational, with the remainder in the process of recruitment of additional staff. Of the new projects, five have commenced delivery of services, and it is expected that the remainder will be operational later in 2007.
(b) In relation to the South Down family health initiative findings, since the report's publication, a part-time project worker has been appointed and a number of local projects have received support from a range of sources. Further funding will be based on an assessment of local priorities and affordability.
Mr. Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what representations he has received from non-governmental organisations on individual producer responsibility and the transposition of article 8.2 of the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive. 
Malcolm Wicks [holding answer 27 April 2007]: The DTIs consultation in July 2006 prompted 15 responses from non-government organisations on the issue of producer responsibility and Individual producer responsibility.
The Government are committed to the principles of Individual Producer Responsibility (IPR) and will continue to work with producers of EEE to establish a workable and cost effective process for IPR in the UK.
Mr. Rogerson: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what discussions his Department has had with the European Commission on the implementation of article 8.2 of the Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment Directive. 
Malcolm Wicks [holding answer 27 April 2007]: DTI representatives have discussed article 8.2 of the WEEE Directive which introduces individual producer responsibility with the EU on several occasions as part of the UKs implementation process.
Mr. David Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry (1) if he will hold discussions with Ofgem on British Gas Services' setting up of a complaints handling service that is available to the public; 
Malcolm Wicks: The Consumers, Estate Agents and Redress Bill, which is currently before Parliament, would place a duty on the Office of Gas and Electricity Markets (Ofgem) to make regulations to prescribe standards for the handling of complaints by regulated suppliers in the energy sector. Regulated energy suppliers will thus be obliged, at the very least, to have in place the prescribed standards of complaints handling. The Bill will also introduce new redress schemes for electricity, gas and postal services, which will be able to resolve the full range of consumer complaints in these sectors and make provision for customer redress, including, where appropriate, the payment of compensation.
Customers currently have access to a complaint-handling service operated by Energywatch if they are unable to resolve a dispute directly with their gas and electricity supplier. Customers may also contact the Energy Supply Ombudsman, which can resolve complaints in respect of problems encountered with billing or changing supplier.
Susan Kramer: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry how much money has been (a) allocated for grants and (b) disbursed by the Low Carbon Buildings Scheme in each month since the scheme began. 
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry pursuant to the answer of 26 March 2007, Official Report, column 1317W, on pregnant women: discrimination, if he will place in the Vote Office copies of the Maternity and Paternity Rights and Benefits in Britain Survey 2005; how members of the public may obtain copies; at what cost; how much it cost his Department to produce the report; what follow up his Department plans to make on the report; how many officials were employed in drafting the report, broken down by grade; and if he will make a statement. 
Jim Fitzpatrick: The Department does not intend to place the report in the Vote Office, however it will arrange for a copy to be lodged in the Libraries of the House. The Maternity and Paternity Rights and Benefits in Britain: Survey of Parents 2005 is publicly available on the Department of Trade and Industry's website. The direct link to the report is: http://www.dti.gov.uk/files/file27446.pdf and the link to the Employment Relations Research Series, in which this publication is number 50, is http://www.dti.gov.uk/employment/research-evalution/errs/. Hard copies of the report are available, free of charge, from the Department's publications order-line0845 015 0010 and quoting the Unique Reference Number (URN) 06/836.
The cost of conducting the survey was shared with the Department for Work and Pensions. The contribution made by the Department of Trade and Industry for conducting the survey, analysis and to produce the report was approximately £150,000. The Department will consider commissioning a follow-up survey in future years to assess the impact of recent legislative change on maternity and paternity rights. The survey report was drafted by Deborah Smeaton and Alan Marsh of the Policy Studies Institute, an independent research institute which was commissioned by the Department. No officials were employed in the drafting of the report.
Mr. Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry what assessment he has made of the safety implications associated with the re-opening of the Thorp reprocessing plant; and if he will make a statement. 
Malcolm Wicks [holding answer 16 April 2007]: The Health and Safety Executives Nuclear Installations Inspectorate issued a Consent on 9 January 2007 to allow the THORP plant to reopensatisfied that the site licensee had done all work necessary to ensure THORP could be restarted safely. The precise date to restart reprocessing fuel at THORP is a matter for the licenseeSellafield Ltd. in discussion with the site owner the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|