|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
This Government are committed to increasing the number of apprenticeships, in particular, advanced and higher apprenticeships. British employers currently face a work force with insufficient skills at intermediate technician and associate professional level, critical to many industries of the future. Expanding Level 3 and Level 4 apprenticeships will make a significant contribution to remedying the shortage of people with this level of qualification.
Mr Hayes: We are determined to make it easier for companies to take on apprentices so that more businesses can access the tremendous benefits they can bring to the workplace. That is why we are redirecting £150 million of Train to Gain in 2010-11 to create an additional 50,000 high quality employer-led places.
We are committed to increasing the number of genuine, high-quality, employer owned apprenticeships based on real jobs in the workplace, and are working with Sector Skills Councils to ensure that our apprenticeship frameworks meet the needs of the real economy.
We are also working to reduce bureaucracy and make the system simpler for employers, colleges, and learners alike. My ambition is no less than to build a system that facilitates more apprenticeships in England than we have ever seen before.
Christopher Pincher: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills what steps his Department is taking to increase the number of apprenticeships, work pairings and training placements in (a) the UK, (b) Staffordshire and (c) Tamworth constituency. 
Mr Hayes: The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills is seeking to drive up the skills levels of the work force by directing public funding where it will bring the clearest benefits. As we stated in the coalition agreement, we will seek ways to support the creation of apprenticeships, internships, work pairings, and college and workplace training places as part of our wider programme to get Britain working.
We have begun to rebalance skills provision by redeploying £150 million of Train to Gain funding to create 50,000 high-quality, employer-led apprenticeship places. We are also taking action to set colleges and training organisations free from excessive bureaucracy and direct state control, to give them the freedom to respond better to local needs.
Tim Farron: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills how many times the Minister of State for Universities has (a) met, (b) spoken on the telephone and (c) corresponded with the Vice-Chancellor of the University of Cumbria since his appointment. 
Mr Davey [holding answer 21 June 2010]: The Secretary of State wrote to all vice chancellors in England, including Professor Graham Upton, interim vice chancellor of the university of Cumbria, on 26 May 2010, regarding the Government's plans to make £6 billon savings this year. A letter will be placed in the Library of the House.
Mr Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills how many (a) front-line and (b) other staff were employed by (i) his Department and (ii) each of its agencies in the latest year for which figures are available; and what his most recent estimate is of the annual cost to the public purse of employing staff of each type at each of those bodies. 
Mr Davey: The latest figures published by the Office of National Statistics for Q4 2009 show total BIS staff numbers at 4,100 which includes 353 BIS staff in regional offices that are not paid by BIS. These figures are not yet broken down by frontline and other staff. The pay costs of employing BIS staff for 2009-10 was £186 million.
I have approached the chief executives of the Insolvency Service, Companies House, the National Measurement Office, the Intellectual Property Office and the Skills Funding Agency and they will respond to the hon. Member directly.
I am responding in respect of the National Measurement Office (NMO) (formerly National Weights and Measures Laboratory) to your Parliamentary Question tabled on 26 May 2010 2010/39 to the Secretary of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, asking how many a) front line and b) other staff were employed by (i) his Department and (ii) each of its agencies in the latest year for which figures are available; and what his most recent estimate is of the annual cost to the public purse of employing staff of each type at each of those bodies.
NMO employed 21 FTE front line staff at a cost of £933.222, and 43 other FTE staff at a cost of £2,361,778 in 2009/10.
I am replying on behalf of the Skills Funding Agency to your Parliamentary Question tabled on 26 May (UIN 529), to the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, concerning numbers and costs of employing frontline and other staff in the Department and its agencies.
The Skills Funding Agency was set up as an agency of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills on 1 April 2010. Staff numbers and estimated costs for Skills Funding Agency 2010-2011 are as follows:
|FTE||Payroll costs (£ million)|
|(1) Staff employed and charged to the programme budget are those we classify as front line staff.|
The Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills has asked me to reply to your question how many (a) front-line and (b) other staff were employed by (i) his Department and (ii) each of its agencies in the latest year for which figures are available; and what his most recent estimate is of the annual cost to the public purse of employing staff of each type at each of those bodies.
The total number of staff employed by The Insolvency Service as at March 2010 numbered 3,125 split between front-line services at 2,817 and other 308.
In 2009-10, some 27% of The Insolvency Service's costs were met by the public purse, with the remainder being met from fee income. The front-line staff working in those activities funded from the public purse totalled 517, at a total cost of £15.5m. It is only possible to estimate the other staff numbers and costs as they are not allocated directly to public purse and non-public purse funded activities. We estimate that out of "other", some 61 staff at £3.3m cost would have been funded from the public purse.
I am responding in respect of the Intellectual Property Office to your Parliamentary Question tabled 26 May 2010, to the Minister of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills.
The Intellectual Property Office (IPO) was established as a Trading Fund to provide services to rights holders. There were an average of 913 full time equivalents (FTEs) working for the Office in 2009/10. All of these costs were met by fees from users at no cost to the public purse.
In line with its Executive Agency and Trading Fund status, the IPO is required to produce a set of Annual Report & Accounts, included in which, are its people costs. The latest set of accounts can be found at:
I am replying on behalf of Companies House to your Parliamentary Question tabled 26 May 2010, UIN 529, to the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills.
Companies House was established as a Trading Fund to provide services to the general public. There was an average of 1063 full time equivalents (FTEs) working for the Agency in 2009/10. All of these costs were met by fees from users at no cost to the public purse.
In line with its Executive Agency and Trading Fund status, Companies House is required to produce a set of Annual Report and Accounts, which includes its people costs. The Annual Report and Accounts for 2009/10 will be laid before Parliament prior to the summer recess.
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills whether he plans to analyse the distributional effect of the options for reductions in his Department's expenditure. 
"look closely at the effects of its decisions on different groups in society, especially the least well off, and on different regions."
Mr Prisk: Plans have not yet been developed, including considering the practical implications taking account of ECGD's powers and duties under its statute, to implement the coalition Government's agreement that ECGD and UKTI should become champions for British companies that develop and export innovative green technologies around the world, instead of supporting investment in dirty fossil-fuel energy production.
ECGD has not supported a coal-fired power station since 2002; were it to consider doing so, it would apply the 'OECD Common Approaches on the Environment and Officially Supported Export Credits' which addresses the environmental impact of projects supported and requires compliance with international standards, usually those of the World Bank Group. Meanwhile, ECGD is participating on behalf of the UK in negotiations to agree export credit terms and conditions within the OECD that will encourage the use of low carbon goods and services.
|Fossil fuel projects( 1)|
|Country||UK exporter||Project||Original level of support provided (£)||Liability start date (est)||Contract completion date (est)|
|(1) Includes oil and gas transportation, coal, oil and gas extractions, power generation and energy exports that involve the use of fossil fuel. Excludes petrochemical projects. (2) Information withheld to protect the commercial interests of the company and ECGD.|
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|