|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Chris Grayling: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 8 February 2010, Official Report, column 788W, on robbery: convictions, how many people in each age group in each court area were convicted of robbery offences. 
Claire Ward: The number of people found guilty of robbery by age group and Criminal Justice System area, England and Wales 1998 to 2008 (latest available) are shown in tables 1 to 11 which have been placed in the Library of the House.
Mr. Hague: To ask the Solicitor-General (1) how many cases are involved in the Attorney-General's inquiry into matters arising from the case of Binyam Mohamed; and when she expects her inquiries to be completed; 
(2) with reference to the answer to Lord Avebury of 12 March 2009, Official Report, House of Lords, columns 1265-6WA, on Binyam Mohamed, when the Attorney-General intends to report to Parliament his assessment of the question of criminal wrongdoing referred to. 
Mr. Maude: To ask the Solicitor-General how many judicial reviews there were involving Government departments according to records held by the (a) Treasury Solicitor and (b) Administrative Court Office in each of the last three years; and how many such reviews were upheld in whole or in part in each such year. 
Specific data on how many such reviews were upheld in whole or in part in each such year are not maintained by the Treasury Solicitor's Department. The information requested can therefore be provided but only at disproportionate cost.
The Administrative Court Office does not retain the information sought in this question. However, it is able to produce information on cases in which a Government Department is shown as first defendant. Where a Government Department is named as a subsequent defendant this information could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. The figures the Administrative Court Office has for cases where a central Government Department was named as first defendant over the last three years are as follows:
With regard to the number of these cases where the application was upheld, in whole or in part, this information is not held and, again, could be obtained only at disproportionate cost. However, the Administrative Court Office's case management system can identify the number of cases each year where Government Departments were named as first defendant and where the judicial review was granted following a substantive hearing. These figures are as follows:
These figures should be treated with considerable caution, since they relate only to the outcome of substantive hearings (not to the outcome of applications at permission stage). A number of cases settle either when permission to apply for judicial review is granted or shortly before the matter is heard substantively.
1. The table shows direct payments to the NLA. Some Law Officers' Departments also pay a fee to the NLA via their cuttings agencies, which act as a collection agency for the licence fees associated with the hard copy cuts provided. It is not possible to quantify these payments over the period requested due to disproportionate cost.
2. The CPS has no record of payment in 2002. It is not possible to provide an explanation for this due to passage of time.
3. Payments in 2008 and 2009 included indemnity payments for previous unlicensed copying or electronic access at the RCPO and AGO respectively.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (1) what (a) correspondence and (b) reports and reviews on safeguarding in Doncaster have been received by (i) the Director for Children and Learners in the Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber and (ii) the Children's Services Adviser in the Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber since 1 January 2004; and on what date each was received; 
(2) what communications his Department has received on safeguarding in Doncaster from (a) the Director for Children and Learners in the Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber and (b) the Children's Services Adviser in the Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber since 1 January 2004; and on what date each was received; 
(3) if he will place in the Library a copy of every item of correspondence between his Department, Ofsted, Doncaster children's services and the Doncaster Safeguarding Children Board, since January 2007; 
(4) if he will place in the Library a copy of the minutes of meetings which (a) the Secretary of State, (b) Ministers in his Department and its predecessor and (c) departmental officials have attended at which safeguarding in Doncaster has been discussed in each year since 2005. 
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (1) whether any official in (a) the Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber and (b) his Department received a copy of Organisation and Management Review of Duty and Assessment and Urban CSSW Teams written by Bron Sanders for Doncaster metropolitan borough council in March 2007; 
(2) whether (a) he, (b) the Director of Children and Learners in the Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber and (c) the Children Services Improvement Adviser in the Government Office for Yorkshire and the Humber, received a copy of the internal report on safeguarding in Doncaster authored in 2007 by Bron Sanders. 
Dawn Primarolo [holding answers 28 January and 1 February 2010]: The report by Bron Sanders on the Organisation and Management Review of Duty and Assessment and Urban CSSW Teams was published by Doncaster metropolitan borough council in April 2009. Neither my Department nor the Government office for Yorkshire and the Humber (GOYH) have found anything in our records which indicates that any Minister or official in DCSF or GOYH received a copy of the report prior to its publication.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families (1) what meetings (a) he and his predecessors, (b) officials in his Department, (c) representatives of the Government office in Yorkshire and the Humber have had with (i) Doncaster councillors, (ii) officers and (iii) representatives of children's services in Doncaster at which safeguarding children was discussed in each year since 2005; 
(2) what meetings (a) the Director of Children and Learners and (b) the Children Services Improvement Adviser in the Government office of Yorkshire and the Humber have had with (i) Doncaster council, (ii) representatives of his Department and (iii) others on serious case reviews and child protection in Doncaster since 2004. 
Dawn Primarolo [holding answers 2 and 8 February 2010]: Since assuming responsibility for supporting and challenging safeguarding performance in LAs in April 2007, Government office for Yorkshire and the Humber (GOYH) officials have met council officials regularly regarding safeguarding and other aspects of children's services.
Following Ofsted's publication of the 2008 APA (Annual Performance Assessment) which rated Doncaster's children's services "inadequate", Ministers and DCSF officials met with the council to discuss the required improvements, and how best to drive them forward. Ministers have since met with the Mayor, council members and council officers over the course of the intervention to discuss the progress of the improvement agenda.
Ministers issued a direction on 12 March 2009, requiring the council to establish an Improvement Board to advise, scrutinise and challenge the council in their improvement planning and work. This has met on a monthly basis, and included officials from DCSF and GOYH in an observer capacity.
Since August 2009, a monthly Performance Challenge meeting chaired by GOYH has run alongside the Improvement Board, and included council members and officers and DCSF officials in its membership; this meeting was designed to provide more detailed scrutiny, challenge and support to specific performance areas.
A new Children's Board (succeeding the Improvement Board), which met for the first time on 29 January 2010, is designed to advise and support the council's and partners' strategic leadership of children's services; DCSF and GOYH representatives attend in an observer capacity.
Tim Loughton: To ask the Secretary of State for Children, Schools and Families how many and what proportion of Ofsted inspectors of (a) primary, (b) secondary and (c) special schools have (i) professional experience of working with and (ii) undertaken specialist training in inspecting provision for children with (A) physical disabilities and (B) special educational needs. 
Your recent parliamentary question has been passed to me, as her Majesty's Chief Inspector, for response.
Detailed information about the professional experience of inspectors in relation to special educational needs and physical disability is not held electronically. However, given that almost all education and training settings have pupils and students with special educational needs and disabilities, and that virtually all inspectors of schools have been teachers, it is almost certain that all of these inspectors have professional experience of working with such pupils.
All inspectors are provided with training on inspecting provision for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities. Ofsted has recently prepared a training update for all school inspectors.
HMI have undertaken this training and the material is currently being prepared for the inspection service providers for use with additional inspectors. Fifty-four HMI and 259 additional inspectors who inspect schools have a specialism in special educational needs and disabilities. These numbers include 10 HMI and 102 additional inspectors with a specialism in physical disability. Some of these inspectors have come from specialist backgrounds; for example, they were formerly teachers or headteachers in special schools or mainstream schools that have specially resourced provision, and others have gained expertise through their work as inspectors. Ofsted is currently preparing updated training for all specialist inspectors. This training will be undertaken from the start of the summer term. In addition, an extensive specialist resource pack for inspecting provision for special educational needs in mainstream and special schools is being revised. This material will also be provided for inspectors from the summer term.
Ofsted is committed to making every effort to deploy specialist inspectors to inspect specialist provision in mainstream and special schools.
A copy of this reply has been sent to Vernon Coaker MP, Minister of State for Schools and Learners, and placed in the library in both Houses.
|Within school pupil:adult ratio (PAR)( 1) in local authority maintained secondary schools. Year: January 2009. Coverage: Mid Sussex parliamentary constituency and England|
|(1) The within school PAR is calculated by dividing the total full-time equivalent (FTE) number of pupils on roll in schools by the total FTE number of all teachers and support staff employed in schools, excluding administrative and clerical staff. Source: School Census.|
John Healey: For the Open Market Homebuy scheme launched on 1 April 2008, provisional estimates indicate that there were 7,919 completed transactions between April 2008 and September 2009. Information on the total number of completions under the scheme will be available in due course.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|