20 Nov 2008 : Column 3MC

20 Nov 2008 : Column 3MC

Ministerial Corrections

Thursday 20 November 2008

Transport

Roads: Construction

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many miles of new road have been built in each year since 1997. [180280]

[Official Report, 6 February 2008, Vol. 471, c. 1153-54W.]

Letter of correction from Paul Clark:

An error has been identified in the written answer given to the hon. Member for Lewes (Norman Baker) on 6 February 2008. The answer given was as follows:

Norman Baker: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many miles of new road have been built in each year since 1997. [180280]

Ms Rosie Winterton [holding answer 21 January 2008]: The following table shows the total miles of trunk road and motorway built in each year from 1997 to December 2007.

Calendar year Scheme miles

1997

75.1

1998

51.5

1999

28.9

2000

23

2001

2.2

2002

19.1

2003

85

2004

31.3

2005

21.5

2006

38.6

2007

28.82

Total

405


These figures are currently being reviewed.

Data on lengths of non-trunk roads are not collected centrally and an overall figure is not therefore available.

The Highways Agency in carrying out its review found that over the years there had been an inconsistent approach in how the information was recorded and reported by its regional offices and scheme project teams. The aforementioned data included trunk road widening as well as schemes that delivered new roads adding length to the strategic road network. The following data represent only new roads adding length to the strategic road network and do not take account of any de-trunking or realignment of the strategic road network which may be within the scope of schemes completed in the years given.

The amended answer is as follows:


20 Nov 2008 : Column 4MC
Calendar year Scheme miles

1997

38.6

1998

12.3

1999

15.6

2000

0.0

2001

0.0

2002

19.0

2003

26.6

2004

10.9

2005

7.9

2006

15.3

2007

10.3

Total

156.5


The Highways Agency is intending to compile a comprehensive set of data in terms of road lengths and capacity. This will clarify whether any ‘new build’ creates additional length to a road in miles or is a widening of an existing length of road which creates increased capacity in the number of lanes provided and therefore increases lane-kilometres rather than road length. The Agency intends that this information will be available on its website in the future.

Treasury

Taxation: Self-assessment

Bob Spink: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much income was received from (a) penalty charges and (b) interest charged to people who did not meet tax return deadlines in each of the last five years. [227556]

[Official Report, 27 October 2008, Vol. 481, c. 790W.]

Letter of correction from Stephen Timms:

Errors have been identified in the table provided in the written answer given to the hon. Member for Castle Point (Bob Spink) on 27 October 2008. The figures for the tax years 2003-04, 2005-06 and 2006-07 were incorrect.

The correct answer should have been:

Mr. Timms: The following information relates to self assessment tax returns.

(a) The following penalty charges were charged for the late submission of self assessment tax returns. The figures relate to each of the tax assessment years rather than the year in which income was received:

Tax year £ million

2003-04

122.4

2004-05

126.1

2005-06

141.l

2006-07

165.8

2007-08

(1)

(1) Return due:
Paper: 31 October 2008
Online: 31 January 2009

Information is only available for four tax years, information prior to 2003-04 can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

(b) Interest is not charged for late submission of a self assessment tax return; interest is charged on the late payment of any income tax due. While interest charges may arise on a tax liability following late submission of a tax return this information is not available separately from interest charged generally on income tax liabilities that are paid late.


20 Nov 2008 : Column 5MC

Health

Care Homes: Inspections

Mr. Hepburn: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many nursing homes inspected by the Commission for Social Care Inspection in (a) South Tyneside, (b) Tyne and Wear and (c) England received a (i) 0 star rating (poor), (ii) 1 star rating (adequate), (iii) 2 star rating (good) and (iv) 3 star rating (excellent) in each year since 2000. [229952]

[Official Report, 28 October 2008, Vol. 481, c. 901-02W.]

Letter of correction from Phil Hope:

An error has been identified in the written answer given to the hon. Member for Jarrow (Mr. Hepburn) on 28 October 2008. A column showing numbers of homes which had not yet been rated was omitted, causing the figures showing ratings awarded to be incorrect.

The correct answer is as follows:

Phil Hope: I am informed by the Commission for Social Care Inspection (CSCI) that it can only provide the information requested from May 2008, when the star rating system was launched.


20 Nov 2008 : Column 6MC

The following tables show star ratings for nursing homes in South Tyneside and England. CSCI does not collect data for Tyne and Wear, which is not a council with adult social services responsibility area.

1. Star ratings of nursing homes in South Tyneside
Number of homes

8 May 2008 13 October 2008

0 stars (poor)

1

0

1 star (adequate)

4

5

2 stars (good)

6

4

3 stars (excellent)

1

2

Not yet rated

0

2

Total

12

13


2. Star ratings of nursing homes in England
Number of homes

8 May 2008 13 October 2008

0 stars (poor)

181

131

1 star (adequate)

1,128

1,012

2 stars (good)

2,130

2,306

3 stars (excellent)

548

590

Not yet rated

125

144

Rating suspended

8

10

Total

4,120

4,193

Source:
CSCI Registration and Inspection database, 8 May 2008 and 13 October 2008 static cuts.


    Index Home Page