|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many unemployed people under the age of 25 years there were in (a) Romford, (b) Essex and (c) Greater London in the most recent period for which figures are available. 
As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking how many unemployed people under the age of 25 years there were in (a) Romford (b) Essex and (c) Greater London in the most recent period for which figures are available. (181655)
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) compiles statistics of unemployment for local areas from Annual Population Survey (APS) following International Labour Organisation definitions.
Table 1, attached, shows estimates of the number of unemployed, aged 16-24, for Romford constituency, for Essex and for London for the 12 months ending June 2007, which is the latest date for which figures are available encompassing all 3 geographies specified.
These estimates, as with any from sample surveys, are subject to a margin of uncertainty.
ONS also compiles statistics for local areas of people claiming Jobseekers Allowance (JSA). Table 2 shows the monthly figure for people aged 18 to 24 claiming JSA in Romford, Essex and London for June 2007. Note, people aged 16 and 17 are not eligible to claim JSA.
|Table 1: Unemployed persons, aged 16 to 24, resident in Romford, Essex and London for the 12 months ending June 2007|
|Level||Rate( 1) (Percentage)|
|(1) Unemployed as a percentage of the economically active population.|
(2) Estimates not available since the group sampling size is zero or disclosive
Estimates are subject to sampling variability.
Annual Population Survey, ONS.
|Table 2: Number of claimants of jobseekers allowance, aged 18 to 24, resident in Romford, Essex and London in June 2007|
|Number||Proportion( 1) (Percentage)|
|(1) Number of claimants expressed as a percentage of claimant count + work force jobs.|
(2) Estimates not available.
Jobcentre Plus administrative system.
As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the number of workless households in the Peterborough Constituency. (181557)
The attached table gives the number of workless working-age households in Peterborough Constituency for the three months ending in June of 1999 and 2001-2007. Comparable figures for 1997, 1998 and 2000 are not currently available. The figures in the table are estimates from the Labour Force Survey (LFS).
A household is defined as a single person, or a group of people living at the same address who have the address as their only main residence and either share one main meal a day or share the living accommodation (or both). A workless working-age household is one that includes at least one person of working age and in -which no-one aged 16 or over is in employment.
As with any sample survey, estimates from the LFS are subject to a margin of uncertainty.
|Workless households( 1) in Peterborough parliamentary constituency( 2 ) April-June 1999 to 2007, not seasonally adjusted|
|Number of workless households|
|n/a = comparable estimates for 2000 are not currently available.|
(1) A workless household is a household with at least one person of working age (male aged 16 to 64 and women aged 16 to 59), and in which no one aged 16 or over is in employment.
(2) Figures have not been adjusted to include estimates for households with unknown economic activity.
As with any sample survey, estimates from the Labour Force Survey are subject to a margin of uncertainty.
ONS Labour Force Survey
Mr. Clappison: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when he expects to answer question 162678, tabled by the hon. Member for Hertsmere on 6 November 2007, on the new deal for young people. 
Mr. Peter Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which public authority has lead responsibility for the monitoring of pesticide residues in animal feed and animal feed ingredients; and if he will make a statement. 
Jonathan Shaw [holding 25 January answer 2008]: The Food Standards Agency has lead responsibility for the Feeding Stuffs (England) Regulations 2005, which set maximum permitted levels for chemical contaminants including certain pesticides in animal feed. Separate but parallel feeding stuff regulations are in place for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. In Great Britain, local authorities are responsible for the enforcement of this legislation and monitoring of feed to ensure compliance with the requirements of the regulations. In Northern Ireland enforcement and monitoring is the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development.
The Pesticides Safety Directorate has lead responsibility for The Pesticides (Maximum Residue Levels in Crops, Food and Feeding Stuffs) (England and Wales) Regulations 2005 which set maximum levels for pesticide residues in plants and animal products whether they may be used for human food or animal feed. Separate but parallel regulations are in place for Scotland and Northern Ireland. The Pesticides Safety Directorate is responsible for the UK's national pesticide monitoring plan, with the advice of the independent Pesticide Residues Committee.
Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many people were (a) charged, (b) convicted, (c) fined, (d) banned from keeping animals, (e) imprisoned and (f) otherwise punished for offences to cruelty to animals in each year since 1997, broken down by type of animal involved. 
Jonathan Shaw [holding answer 24 January 2008]: There are a number of measures in place that provide protection to animals generally and are not species specific. For example, last year the Government introduced the Animal Welfare Act 2006, under which it is an offence to cause an animal, under the control of man, any unnecessary suffering. The Wild Mammals (Protection) Act 1996 makes it an offence to intentionally inflict unnecessary suffering on wild mammals. In addition, the Government are committed to improving the welfare of animals such as through the Animal Health and Welfare Strategy and the Animal Welfare Delivery Strategy.
Jonathan Shaw [holding answer 21 January 2008]: The samples for routine dead wild bird surveillance are collected according to standardised protocols, accredited to a United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS) International Standards Organisation (ISO)17025 quality system. DEFRA employs the diagnostic expertise of the Veterinary Laboratories Agency (VLA), Weybridge, which is the World Animal Health Organisation (OIE) and European Union (EU) Reference Laboratory for avian influenza (AI). Our sampling, collection, storage and transportation methods are entirely consistent with international and European Union standards. We continually revise and subject all aspects of our AI surveillance activities to peer review in light of new international evidence as it arises. Our testing regime conforms to the highest standards for protecting animal and public health.
The delivery target for the following dead wild bird surveillance activities is five days. Eligible wild birds are collected from the field by a collection agency operator (generally from the Meat and Livestock Commission) in a biosecure manner, including double bagging of the bird to protect operator health and safety. The wild birds are then delivered to the nearest VLA regional laboratory, where they are refrigerated (+4° Celsius) pending sampling. Once samples are collected from the wild bird at the VLA regional laboratory they will also be stored at +4° Celsius. Samples are then packaged and despatched. Rapid courier delivery of specimens collected in this manner ensures high quality material is received at the VLA headquarters laboratory for testing. Testing of the samples at VLA Weybridge usually commences as soon as practically possible upon the day of receipt, with samples held at +4°Celsius as required.
We are currently considering this complex issue, taking into account all the available scientific evidence, including the final report of the Independent Scientific Group on Cattle TB (ISG) and the assessment of the scientific evidence made by the Governments former chief scientific adviser, Sir David King. My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State has already met with former members of the ISG including Professor John Bourne; and separately with Sir David King. We also wish to take into account the views from the
Environment Food and Rural Affairs Committee following its inquiry into badgers and bovine TB.
Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what progress his Department has made towards its public service agreement target of a reduction in the number of cases of bovine spongiform encephalopathy detected by both passive and active surveillance to less than 60 in 2006, with the disease being eradicated by 2010; and if he will make a statement. 
DEFRA is continuing to work towards its public service agreement target of eradicating BSE in GB by 2010. However, due to the long incubation period of BSE, achievement of this target will be determined by past events and will be affected by the EUs surveillance regime and the longevity of cattle born before August 1996, in which the prevalence of infection is highest. The Government are working with industry leaders to encourage producers to dispose of these cattle under the older cattle disposal scheme before it closes at the end of 2008.
Future BSE cases born after the reinforced feed ban in August 1996 could also impact on our achievement of the 2010 target although epidemiological assessments have demonstrated a clear decline in the prevalence of BSE infection in successive birth cohorts born after July 1996.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much was paid by his Department to Capita Group plc and its subsidiaries in each financial year since 2000; which contracts were awarded by his Department to Capita Group plc in each year from 2000-01 to the most recent available date; what the cost was of each contract; what penalties for default were imposed in contract provisions; what the length was of each contract; whether the contract was advertised; how many companies applied for the contract; how many were short-listed; what criteria were used for choosing a company; what provision was made for renewal without re-tender in each case; and if he will make a statement. 
Jonathan Shaw: DEFRA came into being in June 2001. From information held centrally, the core-Department's expenditure with Capita Group plc and its subsidiaries since financial year 2001-02 is tabled as follows:
|Vendor Name||2007-08( 1)||2006-07||2005-06||2004-05||2003-04||2002-03||2001-02|
|(1) April to December.|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|