|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
Jim Dobbin: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make more transparent the process for determining when extra rolling stock will be deployed to relieve passenger overcrowding on the railway network. 
Mrs Villiers: The Government recognise the importance of addressing overcrowding problems on the rail network but all policy interventions are subject to appraisal which considers whether they provide value for money to the Exchequer. The appraisal process follows the guidance published by the Department for Transport website at:
The process of determining rolling stock allocation to train operators involves complex commercial negotiations with industry parties, and is handled confidentially in order to secure the best outcome for the taxpayer and the rail user.
Simon Reevell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many carriages have been added to train services in West Yorkshire in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement. 
Simon Reevell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many carriages have been added to train services in London and the South East in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement. 
Furthermore, in December 2009, 174 class 395 carriages were introduced on high speed train services in Kent. Transport for London has ordered 216 new vehicles for services on the North and East London lines, and most are in service.
Simon Reevell: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans his Department has to add carriages to train services in West Yorkshire in each of the next three years; and if he will make a statement. 
Mrs Villiers: Following the National Audit Office Report entitled 'Increasing Rail Capacity', the Department for Transport is undertaking a reappraisal of the previous Government's programme for additional rolling stock, including a reassessment of the business case for each procurement in the light of the changed circumstances. This will review all the options. The proposals relating to services in West Yorkshire will be part of this reassessment.
Mrs Ellman: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent instructions he has issued in relation to the provision of additional carriages on the rail network; and if he will make a statement. 
Jonathan Reynolds: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will issue a rolling stock plan giving details of his Department's plans to manage future trends in passenger numbers on the rail network. 
The Government are assessing their policy for addressing crowding on the rail network in the light of overall spending constraints over the next
few years. Proposals by the previous administration for the purchase of additional carriages will be appraised and assessed for affordability, in parallel with the process for determining the Department for Transport's budgets for the spending review period.
Jonathan Edwards: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what discussions he has had with Severn River Crossing plc on liabilities for long term repairs when the bridges are taken into public ownership; and if he will make a statement. 
Norman Baker: The Highways Agency meets regularly with Severn River Crossing plc (SRC), which is the concessionaire for the Severn Crossing, to ensure handover arrangements are in place when the concession ends. SRC carries out a rigorous schedule of inspections to identify maintenance requirements and is required to maintain and repair defects in compliance with the concession.
At handover the condition of the bridges must be to an agreed standard, to enable the bridges to remain in a serviceable condition for the remainder of their design lives. The risk for defects which existed before the start of the concession, such as corrosion on the M48 Severn Bridge cables, was not transferred to SRC and remains the responsibility of the Secretary of State.
The SRC operates under a Concession Agreement (CA) which was signed in October 1990. The concession period began in April 1992 and will end when SRC has collected a defined amount of money from toll revenue (£995,830,000 in 1989 prices), or up to a maximum of 30 years. The end date is currently predicted for the first half of 2017.
Mr Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he plans to respond to the letter of 24 May 2010 from the hon. Member for Basildon and Billericay on his constituent Mrs Nadia McMahon. 
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Prime Minister (1) whether his adviser on health and safety law and practice, the right hon. Lord Young of Graffham, will receive (a) a salary, (b) expenses and (c) any other payment in that capacity; 
Mr Khalid Mahmood: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for West Bromwich East of 10 June 2010, Official Report, column 224W, on departmental mobile telephones, what the (a) purchase cost of the handset, (b) network provider, (c) type of tariff and (d) name of the supplier was in respect of the telephone issued to (i) him and (ii) the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State. 
(a) The purchase cost of each BlackBerry handset was £250.
(b) The network provider for both handsets is Vodafone.
(c) Both handsets are on the 'Teamwork + BlackBerry' tariff.
(d) Vodafone supplied both handsets.
Ian Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what discussions his Department had with the Ministry of Defence on the implications of devolution prior to Royal Assent to the Scotland Act 1998. 
However, defence of the UK and associated industries are very important to Scotland. As such, I intend to
speak regularly with the Defence Secretary on range of issues relevant to Scotland, particularly once the implications of the Strategic Defence and Security Review are known.
Stephen Mosley: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many parents who were paying child support to the Child Support Agency directly from their salary by deduction from earnings orders in financial year 2009-10 lost some or all of their payments after their employer went into receivership. 
Maria Miller: The Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission is responsible for the child maintenance system. I have asked the Child Maintenance Commissioner to write to the hon. Member with the information requested and I have seen the response.
In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Child Maintenance Commissioner as the Child Support Agency is now the responsibility of the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission.
You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many parents who were paying child support to the Child Support Agency directly from their salary by Deduction from Earnings Orders in financial year 2009-10 lost some or all of their payments after their employer went into receivership. 
The information you requested is not available as the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission (the Commission) does not collate this type of information for management information purposes. However, you may find it helpful to know, as at March 2010, it is estimated that 117,600 cases are receiving maintenance via a deduction from earnings order or request.
In England and Wales, if the non-resident parent's employer enters bankruptcy or liquidation, the non-resident parent is responsible for paying any maintenance which was deducted from their wages by their employer and not paid over to the Commission, and for recovering any money deducted from their employer. They can do this through lodging a claim in the insolvency proceedings.
The official receiver or liquidator appointed to look after the affairs of the employer gives employees a comprehensive information pack which should cover every eventuality, including the non-payment of deductions to the Commission. If a non-resident parent has specific questions not covered in this pack, they should contact the official receiver or liquidator directly.
Scottish law is different. Any money deducted by a deduction from earning order remains part of the non-resident parent's wages until the Commission receives it. However the Commission is responsible for claiming the money and the Commission must lodge a claim in the insolvency proceedings for money deducted and not paid over.
I hope you find this answer helpful.
Mr Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions 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. 
|Jobcentre Plus||Pension, Disability and Carers Service||Departmental staff (shared services)|
Staff figures are shown as full-time equivalents.
Mark Tami: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for West Bromwich East of 15 June 2010, Official Report, column 362W, on departmental mobile telephones, what the (a) purchase cost of the handset, (b) network provider, (c) type of tariff and (d) name of the supplier was of the BlackBerry devices issued to (i) the Minister for Employment, (ii) the Minister for Disabled People and (iii) the Minister for Pensions. 
Chris Grayling: The purchase cost of each handset is £300. The managed service provider is BT and the network provider is Vodafone. The tariff used is the 'Teamworker' tariff-monthly rental and support charges for each handset are £43.75. The costs of the DWP's Blackberry service are higher than that available through the retail market because of additional departmental requirements in relation to security and resilience.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|