|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Janet Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport with reference to her Oral Statement of 9 June 2008, Official Report, columns 22-23, on transport (Greater Manchester), how much of the funding allocated for public transport in Greater Manchester will be allocated to transport routes from East Lancashire. 
Ms Rosie Winterton:
The package of public transport investment included in the Greater Manchester Transport Innovation Fund bid, which was awarded programme
entry on 9 June, is intended to support those most affected by the congestion charge scheme. Those commuting into the Greater Manchester area from neighbouring areas such as East Lancashire, and therefore affected by the charge, will also have access to, and benefit from, the planned improvements to public transport including to rail, bus and park and ride.
Ms Rosie Winterton: The North West Regional Transport Board has prioritised the proposed East Lancashire Rapid Transport scheme for funding as part of the North West Regional Funding Allocation. It is now for Blackburn with Darwen borough council to submit a major scheme business case to the Department for assessment.
Janet Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if she will estimate the cost to the local authority of regulatory approval for construction of a road-based tramway system in East Lancashire; and if she will make a statement. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: The cost of securing approval for funding of any major public transport scheme will depend on a number of items, such as the scale of the scheme; whether a public inquiry is necessary; and the length of time taken to secure approval. The Department contributes up to 50 per cent. of eligible preparatory costs incurred by the scheme promoter between programme entry and full approval. Guidance to local authorities on the preparation of bids for funding is available on the Departments website.
Ms Rosie Winterton: Most support made available by the Department for Transport to local authorities for public transport has been in the form of block grant for capital investment, and it has been for local authorities to determine how much of their overall resources should be spent on public transport.
The following table includes per capita funding for the integrated transport capital funding allocated to Suffolk and England (outside of London) in each of the last five years. This funding is to support local authority investment in both local roads and public transport. The way funding is provided for London means there are no figures comparable to those for Suffolk available for England including London.
The table also includes specific DFT grant funding for Suffolk and local authorities in total in England outside London. The grant are rural bus subsidy and for specific bus projects (i.e. kick-start, rural bus challenge and urban bus challenge).
|Local transport funding per capita in Suffolk and England (outside London)|
All figures are based on 2006 population figures for England and Suffolk.
Adam Price: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what proportion of the enhancement expenditure for Control Period 4 recently published by the Office for Rail Regulation will be spent in Wales. 
Mr. Tom Harris [holding answer 13 June 2008]: In the Office of Rail Regulation's draft Determination of 5 June, £19 million was assigned for infrastructure schemes to support enhanced passenger services in the Cardiff area. In addition, £5.9 million has been assigned for improvements to Welsh stations in the first tranche allocation of funding under the national stations improvement programme. Other investments in the network, including schemes under the Access for All initiative, and upgrade work to the Great West Main Line, will also benefit Welsh rail passengers, either directly or indirectly.
Mrs. Villiers: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which local authorities have been found to be issuing invalid penalty charge notices under section 66(3) of the Road Traffic Act 1991 (a) in London and (b) outside London since the September 2006 decision of the High Court in the case of R v The Parking Adjudicator ex parte Barnet London Council; by what means refunds of invalid penalty charges have been issued; and what steps her Department has taken to advise the public that refunds of invalid penalty charges may be made. 
Ms Rosie Winterton: The Department has no information about the authorities that are said to have issued penalty charge notices after being advised by the Chief Parking Adjudicators of the implications of the judgment in R v. The Parking Adjudicator ex parte Barnet London Council. If a local authority considered it appropriate to refund a penalty charge that had been paid it would need to contact the keeper using the details from their payment record or, if that was not available, from the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency. Local authorities know that they have the power to cancel a penalty charge notice at any stage in the process and to refund a penalty charge that has been paid if they consider it appropriate.
Jim Fitzpatrick [holding answer 16 June 2008]: There is a wide range of speed-reducing technologies currently and prospectively available, from enforcement technologies such as safety cameras through to awareness-raising technologies such as vehicle-activated signs and intelligent speed adaptation. We monitor and undertake evaluations of promising technologies on a continuous basis.
Mr. Walker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to the answer of 22 May 2008, Official Report, column 432W, on carbon emissions at Stansted Airport, how many (a) cargo and (b) long-haul aircraft movements were included in her Departments central forecast of 3Mt carbon dioxide emissions at Stansted Airport in 2030. 
|Forecast passenger air transport movements at Stansted, 2030|
|Thousand per annum|
To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what plenary and functional meetings of the Joint Ministerial Committee there have been in the last 12 months;
which Ministers attended; what the subject matter was of each meeting; and what the date is of the next scheduled plenary meeting of the Joint Ministerial Committee. 
Mr. Paul Murphy: No plenary meetings of the Joint Ministerial Committee have been held in the last 12 months. There have been four meetings in the JMC (Europe) functional format in the last 12 months to discuss current EU business in which the devolved Administrations have an interest. There will be a meeting of the Committee in plenary format on 25 June 2008.
David Mundell: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) when the next meeting of the Joint Ministerial Committee will take place; and how often he expects the plenary Committee to meet thereafter; 
Mr. Paul Murphy: There will be a meeting of the Joint Ministerial Committee in plenary format on 25 June 2008. It is not intended that any Minister will take the place previously allotted to the Deputy Prime Minister at the meeting.
David Mundell: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales what his responsibilities are for overseeing the Joint Ministerial Committee; what mechanisms are in place to ensure that there is no conflict between those responsibilities and his other responsibilities as Secretary of State; and whether he sits on the committee in the same capacity as the Secretaries of State for Scotland and Northern Ireland. 
Mr. Paul Murphy: The Prime Minister announced in Parliament on 30 January 2008, Official Report, column 306, that I am responsible for the Joint Ministerial Committees on devolution. This is in addition to my responsibilities as Secretary of State for Wales, but raises no conflicts with those responsibilities. I sit on the Committee as both the Minister responsible for Joint Ministerial Committees and as the Secretary of State for Wales.
David Mundell: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales (1) pursuant to paragraph A1.5 of the Memorandum of Understanding and Supplementary Agreements Between the United Kingdom Government, Scottish Ministers, the Cabinet of the National Assembly for Wales and the Northern Ireland Executive Committee, what further mechanisms there are for the Joint Ministerial Committee to deal with disputes between the Government and any or all of the devolved administrations; 
(2) pursuant to paragraph A1.5 of the Memorandum of Understanding and Supplementary Agreements Between the United Kingdom Government, Scottish Ministers, the Cabinet of the National Assembly for Wales and the Northern Ireland Executive Committee, whether the Joint Ministerial Committee has the power to resolve
disputes between the Government and any or all of the devolved administrations, if unanimity is not reached between the parties involved; 
(3) what procedures are in place to ensure that the positions of Scottish, Welsh or Northern Irish Ministers are taken into account when disputes are brought before the Joint Ministerial Committee. 
Mr. Paul Murphy: The Memorandum of Understanding and associated documents establishing the Joint Ministerial Committee make clear that the Committee will be available to try to resolve differences, although they lay emphasis on resolution bilaterally or through the good offices of the appropriate territorial Secretary of State, and make clear that the JMC is not a decision-making body. The Committee has in recent years met only in its functional format dealing with European issues, in which there has been no need to invoke formal dispute resolution processes, and accordingly the arrangements for dispute resolution have not developed beyond those set out in the founding documents. Were a dispute to be referred to the Committee that affected a number of Administrations, it would be essential for all with an interest to be involved in its resolution.
David Mundell: To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how many (a) civil servants and (b) full-time equivalent posts there are on the Joint Ministerial Committee Secretariat; and how many members of the Secretariat are from each Government Department and each of the devolved administrations. 
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government how much has been (a) allocated to and (b) received by each local authority under the preventing violent extremism programme. 
Mr. Dhanda: In 2007-08 the Government made the £6 million Preventing Violent Extremism Pathfinder Fund available to around 70 local authorities. A table showing funding broken down by region has been deposited in the Library of the House.
In October 2007 the Communities Secretary announced £45 million over three years for local partnerships to build resilience to violent extremism. A table setting out funding for this financial year and indicative funding for the following two years for local authorities around England has been deposited in the Library of the House.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|