Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how many (a) Ministers and (b) civil servants in his Department received coaching in a foreign language in the last 12 months; what expenditure his Department incurred in providing such coaching; and in what languages such coaching was provided. 
Mr. Hoban: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how many complaints about advertisements sponsored or funded by his Department were made to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) in each year from 1997 to 2008; and how many of these were upheld by the ASA in each year. 
Mr. Michael Foster: The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) received no complaints about advertisements sponsored or funded by the Department for International Development (DFID) in each year from 1997 to 2008.
Mr. Andrew Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development with reference to the answer to the right hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. Redwood) of22 July 2008, Official Report, column 992W, on departmental pay, what the (a) total amount paid in bonuses was, (b) number of staff who were eligible for a bonuses and received (i) no bonus, (ii) a medium bonus and (iii) a maximum bonus was and (c) value of each of the five highest bonuses was; and what process is used to determine the level of bonus. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The table that appears in answer to the right hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. Redwood) on 22 July 2008, Official Report , column 992W, on departmental pay, was based on incomplete data and should have read:
|SCS staff not receiving a maximum bonus
Department for International Development (DFID) senior civil service (SCS) members are eligible for a non-consolidated bonus award. Bonuses are intended to reward delivery of personal business objectives during the reporting year or other personal contributions to wider organisational objectives. In considering SCS members for bonus, an SCS pay committee takes into account:
performance against agreed priority business objectives or targets;
total delivery record over the year;
relative stretch (i.e. the challenge of the job compared to that of others); and
response to unforeseen events that affected the performance agreement.
DFID paid a total of £504,000 in non-consolidated bonuses to 62 senior civil servants for the 2006-07 reporting year and £641,510 in non-consolidated performance bonuses to 71 senior civil servants for the 2007-08 reporting year.
|Number eligible for bonus
|Number of nil bonuses
|Number of low bonuses
|Number of medium bonuses
|Number of high (maximum) bonuses
Mr. Andrew Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development with reference to the answer to the right hon. Member for Wokingham (Mr. Redwood) of22 July 2008, Official Report, column 992W, on departmental pay, how many of the staff eligible for bonuses in 2007-08 were based (a) in the UK and (b) overseas. 
|SCS staff not receiving a maximum bonus
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development on how many occasions his Department has received complaints on staff (a) recruitment and (b) selection in the last 12 months. 
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development for how long each of the staff on secondment from his Department have been on secondment; and whether there is a maximum permitted length for such secondments. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The following table shows the number of Department for International Development (DFID) staff who are currently on outward secondment to other organisations and the length of time they have been on secondment.
|Length of time on secondment
|Number of secondees
Mr. Michael Foster: The Department for International Development (DFID) has allocated £270 million for India in the financial year 2008-2009. In addition to this, in the 2008 calendar year, DFID contributed a further £13.2 million through the European Commission.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what recent assessment he has made of the humanitarian situation in Somalia; what steps he plans to take to protect food monitors; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development (1) what aid he is providing to support the process of capacity-building in the build-up to the elections in Sudan as part of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement; 
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The UK Government are working with the international community and Sudanese counterparts to ensure that an acceptable and peaceful process of elections takes place within the Comprehensive Peace Agreement timeline. Capacity building of key institutions and groups is central to this.
DFID is providing grants of over £1.13 million to media and civil society capacity building programmes in 2008 and 2009. In addition, DFID contributed £1.5 million to the UNDP-managed fund for preparatory support to the elections.
The UK has also provided support to a Swedish-based International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance project to build the capacity of political parties, including £550,000 from the British embassy in first phase (2006-08) and £1 million from DFID has been allocated to the next phase.
Mr. Drew: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development when he will assess the effectiveness of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement in Sudan with reference to the support provided by donor nations. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The core body mandated to assess CPA implementation is the Assessment and Evaluation Commission (AEC). The UK was instrumental in the appointment of Sir Derek Plumbly as its Chair and participates in the Security, Wealth-Sharing, Power-Sharing and the Transitional Areas sub-committees.
Assessment of the effectiveness of the CPA is an ongoing process. The AEC Plenary meets monthly and brings together representatives of the two parties to the CPA. In July 2008, the AEC conducted a mid-term assessment of CPA implementation. This report is a public document and is available on request.
The Multi Donor Trust Funds (MDTFs) (National and South), set up under the auspices of the CPA, are the primary mechanisms for donors to support the
reconstruction and development of war-affected regions in Sudan. Both funds are managed by the World Bank, and monitored by an independent agent.
Mr. Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what information his Department holds on the average life expectancy of females of child-bearing age in Zimbabwe. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis: The World Health Organisation (WHO) estimated in 2006 that the average female life expectancy in Zimbabwe was 34 years of age. This is the most recent estimate. There are no statistics on average life expectancy of women of child bearing age specifically in Zimbabwe. Recent demographic estimates suggest that women of reproductive age have a one in 16 lifetime chance of dying as a result of pregnancy and childbirth.
DFID is providing assistance to support the distribution of antiretroviral drugs (ARVs) to over 40,000 people in 2009 of whom at least 55 per cent. are women. In addition, DFID is spending £25 million on reproductive and maternal health care to help women gain access to contraceptives, essential antenatal care, and emergency obstetric care in order to save lives and protect their health and the health of newborns. We are also working with the UN and others to support broader essential health services, bring the countrys worst ever cholera outbreak under control and to provide food aid to over five million Zimbabweans.
Daniel Kawczynski: To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many people were diagnosed with prostate cancer in (a) 2001, (b) 2002, (c) 2003, (d) 2004, (e) 2005, (f) 2006 and (g) 2007; and in how many cases in each year the prognosis was that the cancer was terminal. 
As National Statistician, I have been asked to reply to your recent Parliamentary Question asking how many people were diagnosed with prostate cancer in (a) 2001, (b), 2002, (c) 2003, (d) 2004, (e) 2005, (0 2006 and (g) 2007; and in how many cases in each year the prognosis was that the cancer was terminal. 
The latest available figures for newly diagnosed cases of cancer (incidence) are for the year 2006. Table 1 gives the numbers of newly diagnosed cases of prostate cancer in England in (a) 2001, (b) 2002, (c) 2003, (d) 2004, (e) 2005, (f) 2006, the latest available figures.
Information on whether the prognosis was terminal is not available. Whether the cancer was terminal could be indicated by the stage/progression of the disease. The stage data collected is not nationally comparable, and reflects differences in what is meant by stage rather than real differences in what clinicians use to classify the patients. The United Kingdom Association of Cancer Registries (UKACR) is investigating what should be counted as a complete stage in an attempt to be able to provide comparable data in the future.
|Table 1: Registrations of newly diagnosed cases of prostate cancer( 1) in England, 2001 - 06
|(1) Prostate cancer is coded to C61 in the International Classification of Diseases. Tenth Revision (ICD-10)
(2) Based on 2007 boundaries
Office for National Statistics