|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Dismore: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 2 July 2007, Official Report, column 910W, on the electoral register: Barnet, when the canvassing took place; how many people were registered (a) before and (b) after the canvassing; and if he will make a statement. 
Bridget Prentice: I understand that in addition to the annual canvass the electoral registration officer at Barnet council commenced a personal canvass of Grahame Park, Colindale on 18 June 2007. Before commencing this canvass the number of registered electors was 4,828. As of the 5 July 2007, the number of new electors that will be added and published in the August register stands at 182. Canvassers will continue to make house to house enquiries until the 10 July 2007.
Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer to Question 147127, on the Huntercombe Young Offender Institution, how the use of PAVA is regulated; what restrictions there are on the use of PAVA; what criteria are taken into account in deciding to use PAVA; who is authorised to make decisions on the use of PAVA; whether exposure to PAVA has lasting physical effects; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Hanson: PAVA is an advanced incapacitant spray. Its use is limited to serious incidents such as hostage taking. Its use may only be authorised by the Gold Commander managing the incident and only specially trained national control and restraint staff may use it. Only those who are specifically trained in its use are authorised to use it. In general it will not be authorised if:
dealing with prisoners at height (because of the risk of injury/falling);
dealing with juvenile prisoners and other prisoners held in juvenile units or secure training centres;
there is reason to believe the intended target has/could develop breathing difficulties following the use of PAVA (e.g. if asthmatic);
a member of healthcare staff is not available on site at the incident to give medical care to any affected by the spray; and
the incident takes place in a privately run prison or immigration removal centres
Keith Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many of the staff seconded from his Department to the Judicial Appointments Commission are of (a) senior leadership, (b) policy and (c) administrative support grades; whether staff who have been seconded to the Judicial Appointments Commission from his Department have maintained the same line management relationships with their existing managers; whether staff who have been seconded to the Judicial Appointments Commission from his Department may receive performance-related bonuses; what assessment he has made of the performance of the Judicial Appointments Commission; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Straw: The Judicial Appointments Commission (JAC) has a complement of 94 staff of which 17 members are temporary contractors on short-term contracts and 77 were secondees from the Civil Service. 70 are seconded from the Ministry of Justice (of these, 40 previously worked from the Lord Chancellor in this area, and 30 have not previously worked in this area); the remaining seven are seconded from other Government departments. In response to a request from the Constitutional Affairs Committee, information about staff seconded to the Judicial Appointments Commission is currently being collated and will be provided by the Chief Executive of the Commission to the Committee on 16 July.
I will place a copy in the Libraries of the House and send a copy to my right hon. Friend. This should answer all sections of this question but if not I should of course be happy to provide my right hon. Friend with as much additional information as is available.
I also refer my right hon. Friend to the written ministerial statement I made to this House on 4 July 2007, Official Report, column 48WS announcing the publication of the Commission's first annual report.
Mr. Heald: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what his Department's policy is on pre-nuptial agreements; and what representations his Department has received from the hon. Member for Grantham and Stamford on this issue; 
Bridget Prentice: Couples are free to make pre-nuptial agreements and apply them in the event of relationship breakdown. In those circumstances the courts will only intervene in their financial affairs if one party wishes to dispute that agreement. Even if the parties dispute it, an agreement is a factor taken into account in any ancillary relief proceedings relating to the couple who made the agreement.
The welfare of any child is the court's first consideration when resolving a couple's financial affairs. Enforcement of prenuptial contracts regardless of their content would displace that principle. An agreement which is very old, or one which does not deal with the couple's current circumstances, or on which the parties had not taken independent legal advice, could be unfair. The agreement might not have considered changes in circumstances, such as the illness of one of the parties, or the birth of children, which would change the parties' earning capacity.
The Ministry has not undertaken research on the impact of pre-nuptial agreements on parties with low incomes and vulnerable individuals. However, we believe that pre-nuptial agreements are most often used by wealthier couples. We think that pre-nuptial agreements could never fully oust the jurisdiction of the court without putting vulnerable parties and children at risk.
Mr. Garnier: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 2 July 2007, Official Report, columns 912-3W, on prisoners: facilities, what sanitary facilities exist within the custody area of court cells. 
I refer the hon. Member to the answer that the then Minister for the Cabinet Office and Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, my right hon. Friend the Member for North-West Durham (Hilary Armstrong) gave him on 8 March 2007, Official Report, columns 2198-99W.
The Prime Minister: Details of the entertainment costs for 2006-07 will be published shortly. Figures for the financial year 2007-08 will be published in the normal way after the end of the financial year.
The Prime Minister: Special advisers are appointed under the terms and conditions set out in the Model Contract and Code of Conduct for Special Advisers, copies of which are in the Library of the House.
The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Member to the press briefing given by my spokesman on 27 June 2007. A transcript of this is available on the No. 10 website (http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page12162.asp), and a copy has been placed in the Library of the House.
Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Prime Minister whether he has responded to the House of Lords Appointments Commissions concerns about the UK tax status of Lord Laidlaw; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Kilfoyle: To ask the Prime Minister (1) whether the Government has agreed to provide funding for the (a) salary, (b) administrative support costs, (c) travel costs and (d) security costs of the former Prime Minister in his new role as Middle East envoy in 2007-08; 
(2) how much funding has been pledged by (a) the United Nations, (b) the European Union, (c) the United States and (d) Russia for the (i) salary, (ii) administrative support costs, (iii) travel costs and (iv) security costs of the former Prime Minister in his new role as Middle East envoy in 2007-08. 
The Prime Minister:
The Government welcome my predecessors appointment as the Quartets Middle East Representative. As Prime Minister, he demonstrated his commitment, over the years, to advancing the peace process. Details of his role and his team, together with potential funding, are being worked out in discussion
with international partners. We are currently considering how we can best support that work.
The Prime Minister: I refer the hon. Member to the press briefing given by my spokesman on 27 June 2007. A transcript of this is available on the No. 10 website (http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page12162.asp) and a copy has been placed in the Library of the House.