Written Answers to Questions
Thursday 14 May 2009
Scotland
Business: Government Assistance
Mr. Donohoe: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what recent discussions he has had with the Scottish Executive on assistance for small businesses in Scotland. [275271]
Ann McKechin: My right hon. Friend continues to have constructive and helpful meetings on the economy and support for business with the First Minister, CBI Scotland and STUC.
House of Commons Commission
Information and Communications Technology
Tim Loughton: To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission how many and what proportion of computers on the House of Commons part of parliamentary estate have been found to be infected with malware in the last 12 months. [275670]
Nick Harvey: In the past 12 months 86 per cent. of computers on the estate have been attacked by malware, 78 per cent. of which were cleaned automatically by Parliament's anti-virus software, with 8 per cent. needing a visit by an engineer. There are 4,991 computers on the estate.
Northern Ireland
Bloody Sunday Tribunal of Inquiry
Mr. Gregory Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland pursuant to the answers of 24 April 2009, Official Report, column 974W, on the Bloody Sunday Tribunal of Inquiry: legal costs, and 30 March 2009, Official Report, columns 851-2W, on the Bloody Sunday Tribunal of Inquiry, in which financial year the legal costs paid in relation to the inquiry in each month since August 2008 were incurred. [274156]
Mr. Woodward: In relation to the lawyers working for the inquiry, I am advised that the costs paid in each month since August 2008 were paid in the same financial year as they were incurred. In relation to the lawyers representing interested parties and witnesses before the inquiry, I am advised that one payment was made in February 2009 to cover costs incurred from July 2001 to December 2004. The payment of these retrospective costs was delayed as they were the subject of lengthy negotiations on the final settlement.
Departmental Dismissal
Chris Huhne: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many members of staff in his Department and its agencies were dismissed (a) for under-performance and (b) in total in each of the last 10 years. [274309]
Paul Goggins: In the Northern Ireland Office, one member of staff has been dismissed for under-performance and 25 members of staff in total have been dismissed from 2002 to date. The following table shows a breakdown of dismissals since 2002.
| Number of staff dismissed | |
Departmental Work Experience
Bob Spink: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland how many work placements his Department offered to (a) school pupils, (b) university students and (c) graduates in each of the last five years. [274480]
Paul Goggins: The Northern Ireland Office facilitates week-long unpaid work experience placements for GCSE students, as well as year-long paid placements for university students as part of their IT degree courses. In addition, the Department offers paid summer placements to undergraduates and graduates with disabilities or from ethnic minorities under a Cabinet Office programme to increase diversity in the civil service fast stream.
The following table gives details of placements offered in the last five years.
| 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | |
Security
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland what recent assessment he has made of the security situation in Northern Ireland; and if he will make a statement. [274613]
Paul Goggins: The 21st Report of the Independent Monitoring Commission, published on 7 May, made clear that dissident activity in the period under review had been at its highest level since they started to report. The continuing high level of violent activity, often with the intention to kill members of the Police Service of Northern Ireland or other security force personnel, is an attempt to destroy the peace process.
The completion of devolution will do more than anything to undermine the dissidents.
I welcome the IMC's comments that both the UDA and UVF are beginning to address the issue of decommissioning. The Government's position is very clear. When the Secretary of State renewed the decommissioning amnesty for the final time in February, he asked the Independent International Commission on Decommissioning for a further report on progress in August. If there has not been substantial progress the decommissioning legislation will be brought to an end.
Electoral Commission Committee
Local Government: Reorganisation
Jo Swinson: To ask the hon. Member for Gosport, representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission what criteria govern the (a) definition and (b) review of local authority boundaries by the Boundary Committee for England; what guidance the Commission has issued to the Committee on (i) the conduct of its work, (ii) whom to consult in defining local authority boundaries and (iii) the account to be taken in future reviews of new housing developments built close to existing local authority boundaries. [275674]
Sir Peter Viggers: The Electoral Commission informs me that when conducting reviews of local authority boundaries, the Boundary Committee for England can recommend to the Secretary of State the alteration of a local government boundary; the abolition of a local government area; or the constitution of a new local government area.
The Committee must have regard to the need to secure effective and convenient local government; and the need to reflect the identities and interests of local communities.
The Electoral Commission's role in relation to boundary reviews is limited to ensuring that the Boundary Committee has sufficient resources to carry out its programme of work. It has not provided the Boundary Committee with guidance or otherwise on the conduct of such reviews, who should be consulted or the matters that should be taken into account.
Local Government: Suffolk
Mr. Spring: To ask the hon. Member for Gosport, representing the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission what data on the views of the general public were used by the Boundary Committee for England in formulating its options for consultation on the future structure of local government in Suffolk. [275178]
Sir Peter Viggers: The Electoral Commission informs me that in formulating its further draft proposals for public consultation, the Boundary Committee had regard to the representations made to it during its July 2008 consultations. All of these representations are available to view on the Electoral Commission’s website.
Mr. Spring: To ask the hon. Member for Gosport, representing the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission how much funding from the public purse had been spent by the Boundary Committee for England on the structural review of Suffolk local government on the latest date for which figures are available; and how much such funding is available for that review for the remainder of the 2009-10 financial year. [275190]
Sir Peter Viggers: The Electoral Commission informs me that the total costs of the Suffolk structural review to 25 March 2009 are £282,535.
For the financial year 2009-10, £269,782 has been allocated for the structural reviews of Devon, Norfolk and Suffolk. Costs for 2009-10 have not been broken down by individual review.
Mr. Spring: To ask the hon. Member for Gosport, representing the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission what proportion of town and parish councils which expressed a view on the Boundary Committee for England’s structural review of Suffolk local government expressed support for one of its preferred patterns without modification. [275221]
Sir Peter Viggers: The Electoral Commission informs me that an analysis by the Boundary Committee of the level of support, or otherwise, from parish and town councils for patterns of unitary local government is not yet complete. Consultation on the Committee’s further draft proposals for Suffolk ends on 14 May. After that date, the Committee will consider all representations received in deciding, what, if any, advice to provide to the Secretary of State. An analysis of the representations received will be published at the end of the review.
Mr. Spring: To ask the hon. Member for Gosport, representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission what ratio of residents to councillors is used in the business case for the pattern (a) A and (b) B option under consideration in the Boundary Committee for England's structural review of Suffolk local government. [275222]
Sir Peter Viggers: The Electoral Commission informs me that the ratio of residents to councillors is not among the criteria that the Boundary Committee has used to identify its further draft proposals.
Mr. Spring: To ask the hon. Member for Gosport, representing the Speaker's Committee on the Electoral Commission how many of the responses to the Boundary Committee for England's July 2008 consultation on the structure of local government in Suffolk expressed the view that Lowestoft should remain part of Suffolk. [275223]
Sir Peter Viggers: The Electoral Commission informs me that of the 1,585 respondents who expressed a view on whether Lowestoft should be included in a Norfolk based authority, 1,326 respondents specifically stated that they considered it should be retained in a Suffolk based authority.
Olympics
Departmental Stationery
Bob Spink: To ask the Minister for the Olympics how much (a) her Office and (b) the Government Olympic Executive spent on the purchase of (i) recycled office supplies in the last 12 months and (ii) printer ink cartridges in each year since her Office was established. [274573]
Tessa Jowell: My Office has been part of the Cabinet Office since July 2007, while the Government Olympic Executive (GOE) is part of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS).
The Cabinet Office and the DCMS purchase recycled office supplies and printer ink cartridges in bulk, and it is not possible to apportion costs for my Office and for the GOE respectively.
The Cabinet Office cost and DCMS costs will be outlined in the answers provided by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport respectively.
Departmental Training
Bob Spink: To ask the Minister for the Olympics how much her Office has spent on IT training for (a) its staff and (b) staff of the Government Olympic Executive in each year since her Office was established. [274237]
Tessa Jowell: My Office has been part of the Cabinet Office since July 2007, while the Government Olympic Executive (GOE) is part of the Department for Culture) Media and Sport (DCMS).
The Cabinet Office and the DCMS have provided IT training for all staff who need it, but it is not possible to apportion costs for my Office and for the GOE respectively.
The Cabinet Office costs and DCMS costs will be outlined in the answers provided by the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport respectively.
Treasury
Banks: Ireland
James Brokenshire: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the value of deposits held by UK citizens in banks in the Republic of Ireland. [270939]
Ian Pearson: As a matter of course, HM Treasury does not comment on individual financial institutions.
Individual Savings Accounts
Mr. Philip Hammond: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the likely effect on the number of people using Individual Savings Accounts of the measures announced in the Budget 2009. [275237]
Ian Pearson: ISAs are extremely popular, with over 18 million people now holding an account. The higher ISA limits announced at Budget for people aged 50 and over from 6 October 2009 and from 6 April 2010 for all savers, will allow all adults to save more tax-free, and could directly benefit over five million individuals who make full use of either their cash or overall ISA allowance.
International Monetary Fund
Mr. Francois: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what his policy is on the representation of EU member states by one voice at the International Monetary Fund; and if he will make a statement. [268603]
Ian Pearson [holding answer 2 April 2009]: Representation in international fora is a matter for individual member states. EU member states are individually members of the International Monetary Fund and are not represented by the EU or by a single voice. Co-ordination procedures between EU member states on international financial issues were agreed upon at the Vienna European Council of 1998 and developed subsequently in discussions among Finance Ministers in Oviedo and Copenhagen in 2002. The Government continue to support these procedural agreements.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |