|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Mrs. Curtis-Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development how much of the proposed £30 million United Nations Peacebuilding Fund is planned to be allocated to Sierra Leone in each of the next three years; on what projects this money will be used; how the funding will be used to assist communities in Sierra Leone to recover from conflict; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr. Ivan Lewis: On 1 March 2007, the Secretary-General of the United Nations formally announced that an allocation of US$35 million from the Peacebuilding Fund (PBF) had been made for Sierra Leone. The Priority Action Plan, agreed with the government of Sierra Leone, identified the following five priority areas for the PBF: Youth Empowerment and Employment, Democracy and Good Governance, Justice and Security, Support to Increased Energy Capacity and Building of Public Administration.
There have now been two project approval rounds undertaken by the in-country Steering Committee. The first in July 2007 which saw a total $16 million allocated for seven projects. A second round took place in July 2008 mirroring the first in terms of the number of projects agreed and funds disbursed. The remaining funds available to Sierra Leone from the PBF, $2.3 million, will shortly be allocated in a final approval round.
The PBF has helped disadvantaged youths to start up small businesses, maintained the electricity supply to Freetown over the last six months and improved access to justice for the citizens of Sierra Leone. Further information on the PBF, progress on its work in Sierra Leone and the projects supported is available on the PBF website:
Mr. Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what humanitarian aid his Department is providing for Sri Lanka (a) bilaterally and (b) via EU organisations in 2008-09. 
£1,500,000 has been committed to the International Committee of the Red Cross for relief supplies such as food and plastic sheets for shelter and medical staff to treat the injured;
£1,000,000 has been committed to the Office of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) for activities such as overseeing the registration of Internally Displaced People (IDPs) and advocating to the government of Sri Lanka for better conditions in camp settlements;
£250,000 has been committed to International Organisation for Migration (IOM) for trucking and logistical services;
£250,000 has been committed to the World Food Programme (WFP) for food delivery and logistical services to other organisations such as non-governmental organisations (NGOs);
£335,000 has been committed to the IOM for emergency assistance in IDP camps;
£750,000 is under consideration for the UN Office for the Co-ordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) for setting up the multi-donor Sri Lanka Emergency Response Fund which will give funds quickly to NGOs once established; and
£915,000 remains on hand ready to be flexibly programmed as the situation demands on the ground changes.
Mr. Thomas: The Department for International Development (DFID) is very concerned about the humanitarian situation in northern Sri Lanka, particularly the fate of the remaining civilians caught in the conflict area. We have made repeated calls for both the government of Sri Lanka and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTEE) to agree an urgent humanitarian ceasefire to allow civilians to leave the conflict area safely and for more humanitarian supplies to be brought in.
My noble friend, Lord Malloch-Brown has regular telephone calls with the Sri Lankan Foreign Minister, most recently on the 16 March, when they discussed the political and humanitarian situation. Our high commission in Colombo continues to convey our concerns to the government of Sri Lanka at every opportunity.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many children of each age at adoption who were adopted in each year since 1997 waited more than (a) six, (b) 12, (c) 18, (d) 24, (e) 30, (f) 36, (g) 42, (h) 48, (i) 54 and (j) 60 months to be adopted. 
Beverley Hughes: Information on the number of children of each age at adoption who were adopted in each year since 2001 and who waited for more than (a) six, (b) 12, (c) 18, (d) 24, (e) 30, (f) 36, (g) 42, (h) 48, (i) 54 and (j) 60 months to be adopted has been placed in the House Library.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what percentage of school pupils who are children in care have been classed as persistent absentees in each of the last five years. 
Beverley Hughes: The OC2 data collection collects information on a range of outcomes for looked after children from local authorities. This information has been published in the Statistical First Release Outcome Indicators for Children Looked After, Twelve months to 30 September 2007England (SFR 08/2008), which is available on the Departments website via the following link:
Information on the absence from school for looked after children was first collected in 2000, figures for earlier years are also published on the Departments website and can be found via the following links:
Sarah McCarthy-Fry: The Department for Children, Schools and Families and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport are working together to increase the amount of physical education (PE) and sport that young people receive through the delivery of a national strategy, introduced in 2003. As a result, the percentage of five to 16-year-olds taking part in at least two hours high quality PE and sport each week has increased from 62 per cent. in 2003, to 90 per cent. in 2008.
We now want to build on this and provide up to five hours of sport each week for young people. This will be made up of two hours of high quality PE within the school day for all five to 16-year-olds, and up to three further hours of sporting opportunities beyond the school day for all five to 19-year-olds.
Mr. Bone: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what funding his Department has provided to local authorities for services for child victims of human trafficking in 2008-09. 
Beverley Hughes: The information requested is not collected centrally. It is appropriate that each local authority shapes the services they provide to meet the needs of the local population. Where a local authority identifies a child who requires support, including those that have been trafficked, they are then responsible for identifying appropriate services to meet their needs, including being kept safe from any likely harm.
Beverley Hughes [holding answer 27 March 2009]: On 10 March 2009, the Executive Board of the UK Council for Child Internet Safety, made up of representation from across Government, industry, law enforcement and the third sector, agreed that the Child Internet Safety Strategy should be published in the autumn.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families whether staff in his Department (a) received and (b) proposed revisions to draft sections of Lord Laming's report on the Protection of Children in England. 
Beverley Hughes: As is common practice, officials in this Department were kept informed about the development of Lord Laming's independent report and were given the opportunity to comment at key stages.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what powers his Department has to prevent a local authority publishing a redacted and anonymised full serious case review commissioned from its own local safeguarding children board. 
SCRs inevitably include a great deal of case material that should remain confidential, not only to protect vulnerable people, but also because SCRs depend upon the cooperation of witnesses, often in a highly charged situation. Without this assurance many would be reluctant to participate in the process, rendering the task worthless. The future of SCRs depends, to a large degree, on the guarantee of confidentiality. Full reports should remain confidential beyond the immediate partners involved in a case....
The Government agrees with Lord Laming's view. Government statutory guidance, Working Together to Safeguard Children (2006) identifies the importance of maintaining confidentiality in SCRs in respect of personal information contained within reports on the child, family members and others. It also highlights the importance of maintaining public confidence in the process of internal review, securing full and open participation from the different agencies and professionals involved and balancing the constraints on public information-sharing when criminal proceedings are outstanding. The importance of this is reinforced by the passage referred to above in Lord Laming's Report. Working Together to Safeguard Children sets out clearly that the LSCB SCR overview report should contain an executive summary that will be made public.
The confidentiality of full SCRs makes the provision of a high-quality executive summary all the more important. Executive summaries should provide an accurate reflection of all the main points in the full report, include a copy of the full action plan, and provide the names of all the SCR panel members so that the public can have confidence that a senior and multi-agency panel, as well as an independent chair and independent author, have been in charge of the process.
Working Together is issued as guidance to local authorities under section 7 of the Local Authority Social Services Act 1970 and as such should be followed. Any departure from such guidance could be subject to public law action by the Secretary of State subject to the specific circumstances and context of the case.
Mr. Rob Wilson: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families whether it is his Departments policy to offer staff (a) additional leave entitlement for Christmas shopping and (b) Christmas bonus payments. 
Many schools who use the GCSE short course in citizenship have indicated an interest in the full course. In 2008, 84,588 pupils at the end of key stage 4 were entered into the GCSE short course in citizenship.
Mr. Philip Hammond:
To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what estimate he has made of the cost to his Department of measuring
compliance with its targets under its public service agreements in the last 12 months for which figures are available. 
Sarah McCarthy-Fry: It is not possible to estimate the cost to the Department of measuring compliance with its targets under its public service agreements in the last 12 months without incurring disproportionate cost.
Grant Shapps: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families what (a) summits, (b) conferences and (c) seminars his Department has hosted since January 2008 at which a primary subject of discussion was the effect of the economic situation on matters within his Departments responsibility. 
Sarah McCarthy-Fry: Responding to the economic situation is a high priority for the Government. Summits, conferences and seminars are some of the methods used to engage stakeholders in this work and ensure action is co-ordinated and effective. While the Department has not hosted any summits, conferences or seminars at which a primary focus was the effect of the economic downturn, Ministers and senior officials have attended a number of meetings with stakeholders at which the economic situation was discussed.
Mr. Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families pursuant to the answer of 18 May 2009, Official Report, column 1248W, on health education: sex, if he will place in the Library a copy of the evidence the Sex and Relationships Education Steering Group commissioned on parents views on sex and relationships education; and if he will make a statement. 
Beverley Hughes: A copy of the presentations given to the sex and relationships education (SRE) steering groupwhich summarised the available evidence on parents views on SREwill be placed in the House Libraries. The presentations provided the basis for detailed discussion by the steering group (many of whom have practical experience of working with parents on SRE) on how schools can better engage with parents on SRE delivery.
We believe that the provision of SRE should be a partnership between parents and schools. Parents should lead on instilling values in their children, but schools have a clear role in giving young people accurate information and helping them to develop the skills they need to make safe and responsible choices. Available evidence suggests that the majority of parents support the provision of SRE in schools.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|