|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Barbara Follett [holding answer 19 November 200 7 ]: I have had many discussions with ministerial colleagues on this subject. On 6 December 2007, the Government published its response to Baroness Corston's Review, which is available at:
In our response, we agreed to promote the effective use of community orders as an alternative to custody. They will emphasise a demanding regime of contact hours, and a mixture of punitive and rehabilitative requirements, including a more extensive use of curfews. In addition, in our response to Baroness Corstons Review, we made a commitment to set up projects, which will report next April, to look at alternatives to custody and review the future of the women's prison estate.
Susan Kramer: To ask the Minister for the Olympics how many (a) male and (b) female members of staff of the Government Olympics Executive were issued with personal digital assistants in each year since 2001; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr. Don Foster: To ask the Minister for the Olympics if she will place in the Library the latest copy of the Olympic Delivery Authoritys (a) register of interests and (b) register of gifts and hospitality. 
Mr. Love: To ask the Minister for the Olympics how many local authority tenants will be displaced from their housing as a result of the 2012 Olympics; how their housing needs will be met; and if she will make a statement. 
Tessa Jowell: The only social housing tenants affected by the Compulsory Purchase Order for the Olympic and Paralympic Games were at Clays Lane Housing Estate, which was located north of the Stratford City site. The estate comprised 450 social housing units, within which there were 425 residents who needed re-housing.
Working closely with a wide partnership of social housing providers over a period of 18 months, the LDA established a range of options from which tenants could choose to relocate. All tenants were offered the opportunity to relocate to an assured tenancy or equivalent and the vast majority of tenants relocated to properties that they themselves had selected as best matching their requirements. Tenants were able to bid for social rented properties covered by local authority nominations and available through choice-based letting schemes, and were prioritised in the allocation procedures. They were also able to choose to relocate to properties owned by a wide range of registered social landlords. Direct offers were made to those tenants without an identified relocation property at the end of April 2007, based on an understanding of the individuals preferences for their relocation.
Mr. Jeremy Browne: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how much his Department paid in bonuses to press and communication officers in each of the last 10 years; and what the (a) highest and (b) lowest such bonus was in each of those years. 
David Cairns: The Scotland Office was established on 1 July 1999. Staff in the Office are on loan from the Scottish Executive (SE) and the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) who each have bonus schemes, part of which relate to annual performance appraisal. The Scotland Office does not hold information on bonus payments under these annual performance appraisal systems. Under the Special Bonus Scheme of the SE and the Reward and Recognition Scheme of the MOJ, the Office may also directly authorise bonus payments for special effort, achievement and commitment; since 1999, the Office has made one bonus payment of £150 to a press officer.
Mr. Jeremy Browne: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland how many (a) parking tickets and (b) speeding fines were issued for vehicles used by his Department in each of the last 10 years; and what the cost to the public purse of those penalties was in each year. 
David Cairns: The Scotland Office was established on 1 July 1999 and maintains the policy that road traffic violations, such as parking tickets and speeding fines, remain the responsibility of the individual and are not reimbursed from public funds.
David Cairns: The Scotland Office was established on 1 July 1999 and was not therefore responsible for the initial funding of the Scottish Parliament election in May 1999. Since July 1999, the Office has, however, paid £5.562 million in respect of the 1999 election. Earlier costs were incurred by the Scottish Office and figures are not available.
The Office has paid £12.071 million for the 2003 election; it is estimated that the cost of the 2007 election will be £19 million. The final cost of the 2007 election will not be known until all the accounts are submitted by returning officers; they have 12 months in which to submit accounts.
David Cairns: The Scotland Office has made no payments directly to DRS. The responsibility for making such payments lies with returning officers who have 12 months in which to submit accounts to the Secretary of State.
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether his Department met the target in the sustainable operations on the Government Estate programme to reverse the then upward trend in carbon emissions by April 2007. 
Mr. Paul Murphy: In 2006-07 my Department spent £17,240 on advertising for a new Head of Communication, just under 0.3 per cent. of total Wales Office expenditure that year. The Wales Office has incurred no other expenditure on advertising in the period of nearly nine years since it was created.
Mr. Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales whether his Department is working towards an accredited certified environmental management system (a) for its whole estate or (b) in some of its buildings. 
Mr. Jeremy Browne: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many (a) parking tickets and (b) speeding fines were issued for vehicles used by his Department in each of the last 10 years; and what the cost to the public purse of those penalties was in each year. 
Dr. Fox: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the most recent tour intervals were of each regiment in the (a) Household Cavalry, (b) Royal Armoured Corps and (c) the Royal Logistic Corps. 
|Royal armoured corps unit tour intervals|
|Unit deployed||Last operational deployment (as a unit)||Start date||Previous operational deployment (as a unit)||End date||Last unit tour interval (months)|
|(1) Subunits from Household Cavalry Regiments and Light Division have deployed in support of operations. The deployments listed are the unit deployments, defined as a regiment deploying with a regimental headquarters and more than two manoeuvre subunits for four months or more. Only the unit deployments will be included in the calculation.|
(2) 2 RTR last deployed as a unit on OP TELIC 1 (March 2003June 2003). MOD records date from January 2003 and therefore we have no record of any unit deployments prior to Op TELIC 1.
The unit tour interval is a less relevant measure when applied to The Royal Logistic Corps. This is largely due to the frequency with which personnel move between formed units within these Corps (which means that the personnel deployed with a unit will be substantially different from the personnel who deployed with the same unit on a previous occasion). Unit tour interval data for this Corps is unrepresentative and therefore not routinely collated.
Mr. Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects to receive the 2008 report on armed forces pay from the Armed Forces Pay Review Body; and when he expects to publish the report. 
Des Browne [holding answer 29 January 2008]: The Armed Forces Pay Review Body (AFPRB) is an independent body and the precise timing of the submission of their 2008 report is a matter for it to decide. The Government will announce their response and publish the report once they have considered the AFPRBs recommendations.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|