|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what opinion polls his Department has conducted of (a) the public and (b) staff since 27 June 2007; and what the (i) name of the firm employed to conduct the poll, (ii) purpose and (iii) cost to the public purse was in each case. 
Gillian Merron: Of the 14 buildings occupied by the Cabinet Office, eight are considered to be fully accessible and six are considered to be not fully accessible to disabled people. Most of the not fully accessible buildings are listed. Accessibility improvements are being implemented as part of an ongoing rolling programme of work, involving English Heritage and the local planning authority as necessary in the context of making adaptations to the grade 1 and 2 listed buildings.
Mr. Maude: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster whether (a) electronic and (b) hard copy guidance, in addition to the Ministerial Code, has been circulated by the Government on the use of Dorneywood by Departments and Ministers, other than the Chancellor of the Exchequer as the official resident. 
http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/upload/assets/www.cabinet office.gov.uk/propriety_and_ethics/ministerial_code_ current.pdf
Mr. Maude: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what plans the Cabinet Office has to prevent public authorities from using the .gov.uk domain name if they do not meet accessibility standards. 
Gillian Merron: The Governments objective is to ensure that all public sector websites are accessible. To encourage wider access to public services online and to help Departments fulfil their duty under the Disability Discrimination Act, the Government set minimum standards for public sector website accessibilitywhether or not they use the .gov.uk domain name.
The Government also set the policies for the registration of .gov.uk domain names. Options for ensuring that all websites with .gov.uk domain names meet the Governments minimum accessibility standards were included in draft guidance for consultation (Delivering Inclusive Websites (TG102)). We will be considering responses to the consultation to assess the most effective means of meeting the overall objective of ensuring accessibility.
Mr. Maude: To ask the hon. Member for Gosport, representing the Speakers Committee on the Electoral Commission how much the Electoral Commission spent on (a) foreign travel and foreign subsistence and (b) hospitality in 2006-07. 
Peter Viggers: The Electoral Commission informs me that, in 2006-07, expenditure on overseas travel and subsistence was £5,942 and on hospitality £61,545. This latter figure includes hospitality to external guests; refreshments for stakeholder meetings and working lunches; and the organisation by the Commission of conferences and public meetings.
Mr. Maude: To ask the hon. Member for Gosport, representing the Speakers Committee on the Electoral Commission if he will place in the Library a copy of the recognition agreement between the Electoral Commission and the Public and Commercial Services Union. 
Mr. Andrew Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development pursuant to his written ministerial statement of 15 November 2007, Official Report, column 92WS, on Departmental Expenditure (DfID), if he will make a statement on the transfer from his Departments budget of £1 million to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport in relation to the London 2012 International Sport Development Initiative. 
Mr. Douglas Alexander: DFID recognises the potential to promote development through sport as a way of improving the lives of young people in developing countries. DFID has therefore agreed to work with UNICEF and others on the London 2012 Sport Development Initiative. DFID is providing £1 million to the Department for Culture, Media and Sport this financial year and a further £1 million next financial year by way of contribution to the initiative. This funding will go towards the implementation of pilot programmes in Zambia, Brazil, Palau, India and Azerbaijan.
Andrew Selous: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how many staff (a) have applied to work flexible hours and (b) work flexible hours (i) in the Department and (ii) the Executive agencies for which the Department is responsible. 
On joining DFID, and at any subsequent time, all staff have the option to request to join our Flexible Working Hours Scheme (FWHS). Agreement to this is made by line managers, taking into account the operating needs of their unit. Options include home and remote working, term-time working, reduced hours, compressed hours and flexible start and finish times.
We do not retain a central register of staff who have asked to join our FWHS, nor of all those who are working under those arrangements. In our recent Management Survey, 84 per cent. of DFID staff strongly believed their line managers actively support flexible working.
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what opinion polls the Department has conducted of (a) the public and (b) staff since 27 June 2007; and what the (i) name of the firm employed to conduct the poll, (ii) purpose and (iii) cost to the public purse was in each case. 
Delivered by Taylor Nelson Sofres (TNS), contracted via the Central Office of Information (COI) following a tender process.
Purpose: assess public understanding of poverty in developing countries and awareness of the Millennium Development Goals and measures to reach them.
Overall cost: £47,500 + VAT (including COI fees).
DFID Management Survey 2007 was managed in-house.
Purpose: to help continually monitor and improve how DFID is managed.
Overall cost: Staff and Information and Communications Technology (ICT) resources were all in-house and so can not be disaggregated without disproportionate cost.
Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how many full-time equivalent staff are responsible for brand management and marketing in his Department and its agencies. 
Mr. Malik: DFID employs eight full-time equivalent staff who are responsible for a range of marketing and communication activities. Their work incorporates the production of publications, a departmental magazine, work on commissioning audience research, support to communications officers in countries outside of the UK and, where necessary, work related to brand management. There is not one person with sole responsibility for brand management.
Mrs. James: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what progress his Department has made in helping (a) reduce and (b) prevent child labour in (i) Asia, (ii) Africa and (iii) Latin America. 
Mr. Malik: DFID is helping to reduce and prevent child labour by tackling the underlying poverty that is at the root of the problem. Our support to national governments enables them to create alternative livelihood opportunities for families and increase access to appropriate, good quality education for all children. In addition DFID is supporting a number of targeted programmes through UN bodies and civil society organisations. Examples include:
i. In Asia we have committed over £5 million to the International Labour Organisations Elimination of Child Labour Programme in Andhra Pradesh. This is helping children leave work and get into school, along-side supporting new income generating programmes for their parents.
ii. In Africa we are providing £120 million this year to support the Government of Tanzanias National Strategy for Growth and Poverty Reduction in which child labour has been identified as a key poverty challenge. We are working with UNICEF in 13 countries to support orphans and vulnerable children to access education and to protect them from abuse including harmful child labour. We also supported their work to disarm, demobilise and reintegrate former child soldiers.
iii. In Latin America DFID is supporting the work of non-governmental organisations in the region, including over £400,000 to the Adventist Development and Relief Agency (ADRA UK) who are helping to reduce the number of working children in Lima, Peru.
Mr. Gale: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what (a) vaccination, (b) treatment services and (c) complementary livestock feeding has been undertaken by the UN High Commission for Refugees and its implementing partners in 2007. 
Mr. Malik: UNHCR is not able at this stage to provide 2007 data on vaccination programmes and treatment services. Data are currently being collated for publication in UNHCRs Global Report 2007 which will be published in March next year. UNHCR has no complementary livestock feeding programmes.
The target population of UNHCR and its implementing partners for vaccination programmes and treatment services are refugee children under five. UNHCR has established an annual programme of immunisation against eight major childhood diseases and provides free treatment and health services through its implementing partners. Where possible, it also provides local health services in fourteen countries in Africa and Asia.
With the exception of Chad and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), UNHCRs immunisation and treatment services reached 90 per cent. of the target population in 2006. Expectations are that coverage will be maintained or increased in 2007.
The Solicitor-General: The relevant provisions of the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006 were only implemented on 1 October 2006. So far, no one has been charged under these provisions and, accordingly, there have been no convictions.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Solicitor-General when HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI) last produced a report on the effectiveness of the Crown Prosecution Service in Essex; under what legislation HMCPSI produce effectiveness reports; what recent representations she has received on the effectiveness of the Crown Prosecution Service in Essex; and if she will make a statement. 
The Solicitor-General: HM Crown Prosecution Service conducted an Area Effectiveness Inspection of CPS Essex in January 2007 and was pleased to take into account the evidence contributed by the hon. Member. Such inspections are carried out as part of HMCPSIs functions under section 2(1)(a) of the Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate Act 2000. The report was published on 7 August 2007 and HM Chief Inspector wrote to the hon. Member enclosing a copy.
HMCPSI has received no representations since then about the performance of the CPS in Essex but made a further visit to Essex in October as part of its series of Overall Performance Assessments. That report is currently being prepared and is expected to be published in January or February 2008.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Solicitor-General how many prosecutions for criminal offences have been pursued in (a) Essex and (b) England by the Crown Prosecution Service in each of the last two years, broken down by offence. 
The Solicitor-General: I have placed in the Library a table which shows the number of defendants whose case was completed by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) in each of the last two years in England (excluding Wales) and in CPS Essex.
The majority of cases completed by the CPS are allocated to one of 12 broad categories indicating the principal offence with which the defendant was charged. The table shows the total number of cases prosecuted; together with the number and proportion
of cases falling into each of these broad offence categories. The comparatively small number of cases that are not assigned a broad offence category include those that are administratively finalised, for example, those in which the defendant has died or cannot be traced before the case is concluded.
Mike Penning: To ask the Solicitor-General in how many cases she asked the Crown Prosecution Service to send her trial papers because of concern about the leniency of a sentence in each month of the last five years. 
The Solicitor-General: The Attorney-Generals Office publishes annual statistics on unduly lenient sentence references on its website www.attorneygeneral.gsi.gov.uk. The statistics are recorded by reference to each calendar year and are not broken down by individual month.
The following table shows the numbers of offenders whose sentences were considered as possible unduly lenient sentences by the Law Officers in each of the last five years for which full statistics have been published.
|Offenders considered by the law officers|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|