|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Martin Horwood: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what his most recent estimates of household incomes are in (a) Cheltenham constituency, (b) each of the Gloucestershire constituencies and (c) the South West region, broken down by households with a weekly income of (i) up to £100, (ii) between £100 and £150, (iii) between £151 and £250, (iv) between £251 and £350, (v) between £351 and £450, (vi) between £451 and £600, (vii) between £601 and £750 and (viii) £751 or over. 
Martin Horwood: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what recent estimate he has made of the number of (a) people who have died and (b) estates subject to inheritance tax in (i) Cheltenham constituency, (ii) each of the other Gloucestershire constituencies and (iii) the South West region in each of the last five years; 
(2) what recent estimate he has made of the amount raised from inheritance tax in (a) Cheltenham constituency, (b) each of the other Gloucestershire constituencies and (c) the South West region in each of the last five years. 
|Table 1: Number of deaths, parliamentary constituencies in Gloucestershire, and the South West government office region, 2002-2006( 1)|
|(1) Based on deaths registered in each calendar year|
Mr. Letwin: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the Security and Intelligence Agencies' (a) administrative expenditure, (b) other current expenditure, (c) grant expenditure, (d) operating appropriations in aid (A in A), (e) capital and (f) non-operating A in A outturn, broken down in (i) near cash and (ii) non-cash terms was for financial years 2001-02 to 2006-07. 
Mr. Letwin: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will break down in (a) near cash and (b) non-cash terms columns 1 to 8 of the subhead detail tables for the Security and Intelligence Agencies contained in the (i) main estimate, (ii) winter supplementary estimate and (iii) spring supplementary estimate for financial years 2001-02 to 2007-08. 
Mr. Bellingham: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the single anti-terrorism budget announced in the 2007 pre-Budget report includes funds for the provision of legal aid in terrorist cases. 
Mrs. Villiers: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Treasury has authorised additional borrowings by Transport for London to help them meet liabilities relating to the administration of Metronet. 
Andy Burnham: The Department for Transport has been in discussion with Transport for London as part of the process of the Comprehensive Spending Review about their future funding needs, including any liabilities they may face as a result of Metronets entry into administration. These discussions are ongoing.
The Low Pay Commission recommends the new rates of the minimum wage to the Government each year to ensure a decent minimum rate of pay for all employees. As part of its responsibilities, the Commission also carries out surveys of firms and sectors with a high proportion of low-paid workers.
Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) if he will make it his policy to publish estimates of total public service pension liabilities on a regular basis in the future; 
Andy Burnham: Total unfunded public service liabilities are estimated to be £530 billion at 31 March 2005. The two previous comparable estimates of this total were £460 billion at 31 March 2004 and, and £425 billion at 31 March 2003. The estimates for years prior to 2003 were not made on a comparable basis. As noted in the 2007 pre-Budget report (Cm 7227), updated estimates of the unfunded public service liability will be published alongside the next long-term public finance report.
Mr. Willetts: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the figures are that underlie the chart at the web address http://csr07.treasury.gov.uk/spending-by-age/. 
Andy Burnham: The chart concerned depicts the broad pattern of lifetime spending and revenue for a purely illustrative individual. It is informed by Treasury analysis of statistical sources such as the Family Resource Survey, Expenditure and Food Survey and General Household Survey, available at:
Andy Burnham: The Comprehensive Spending Review sets the spending envelope for departments over the CSR07 period. Home Office resources will increase by 1.1 per cent. a year in real terms over the CSR 07 period. Regional police funding allocations from within the Home Office settlement are the remit of the Home Secretary and the provisional police grant settlement for the CSR07 period has yet to be announced. The CSR period will see planned defence expenditure increase by 1.5 per cent. in real terms.
Mr. Sheerman: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many public sector workers have been relocated (a) outside London, (b) outside London and the South East, (c) in the three Northern regions, (d) in Yorkshire and the Humber, (e) in West Yorkshire and (f) in Huddersfield since the publication of the Lyon's Review; and what assessment he has made of this performance's compliance with the conclusions of the Lyons Review of the location of public sector workers. 
2,980 of these posts had been moved to the North West, 2,974 posts had been moved to Yorkshire and the Number and 727 had moved to the North East. To date, no posts have moved to Huddersfield, but the local area has benefited substantially with 529 posts relocated to Leeds.
John McDonnell: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the (a) overall paybill increase, (b) average basic pay and progression increase and (c) average performance pay of annual pay increases for (i) the civil service, (ii) local government workers, (iii) teachers and (iv) NHS staff was in each year since 1997. 
Andy Burnham [holding answer 10 October 2007]: Individual local authority employers determine local government pay. Pay for teachers and NHS staff is the responsibility of the Department for Children, Schools and Families and Department of Health respectively.
The setting of all aspects of pay and terms and conditions below the senior civil service was delegated to Departments and agencies in 1996. Information relating to the detail of average basic pay, performance pay and progression increases (questions (b) and (c) ) is therefore not held centrally.
Table 1.9 of the 2007 Public Expenditure Statistical Analyses (Cm 7091) includes details of administration
costs paybill for the civil service. It should be noted that changes in paybill can be affected by a number of factors beyond pay increases for staff. These include changes in workforce numbers and composition, and the effects of employer contributions.
Mr. Djanogly: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much compensation was paid to (a) companies and (b) individuals following investigations against them by HM Revenue and Customs and by each of its predecessors, the Inland Revenue and HM Customs and Excise, in each of the last 10 tax years. 
Jane Kennedy: HMRC makes redress payments for mistakes and unreasonable delays, as did its predecessors. The total sums for the last three years are published in HMRC annual reports. In previous years these payments were not specified in the annual reports of either of the predecessor departments. It is not possible for any of the years in question for HMRC to distinguish whether any payment was made in consequence of an investigation.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families whether a Task Force, Steering Group or any other regular series of meetings was set up to consider the transfer of the delivery of the Academies programme to Partnerships for Schools. 
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families on what dates liaison meetings were held between the academies and schools capital divisions in his Department and Partnerships for Schools since July 2005. 
Jim Knight: Frequent meetings have taken place between the Department and Partnerships for Schools (PfS) in this period, ranging from strategic meetings with Ministers and PfS to day-to-day operational meetings. A full response to this question could therefore be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families whether his Department gained the approval of (a) HM Treasury and (b) the Prime Minister for the transfer of the delivery of the Academies programme to Partnerships for Schools. 
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what guidance his Department has issued to (a) schools, (b) local authorities and (c) partnerships for schools on the action plan drawn up to address the recommendations of the Prime Ministers Delivery Units review of the Building Schools for the Future programme. 
Jim Knight: No guidance has been sent to schools, local authorities or Partnerships for Schools as a direct result of the Prime Ministers Delivery Units review of BSF. The reports recommendations have been taken into consideration as guidance has been refined and developed. No guidance has been issued to Partnerships for Schools, but we continue to work closely with them in developing materials and guidance for the programme.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what guidance documents his Department, and its predecessor, issued to (a) local authorities and (b) schools on (i) the Building Schools for the Future programme and (ii) the Academies programme since each commenced. 
Jim Knight: The Department and Partnerships for Schools have issued an extensive range of publications with schools and local authorities included in their target audiences. For BSF, these include the Strategy for Change guidance, business case and procurement guidance, ICT guidance and the Schools for the Future design guides series. All guidance is available at:
For Academies, publications include: 400 AcademiesProspectus for Sponsors and Local Authorities; Academies and independent schools: prospectus; and Academies, Trusts and Higher Education: prospectus. In addition, Partnerships for Schools has issued a range of guidance, available at:
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|