Patrick Mercer: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what occasions since January 2008 officials of his Department have met representatives of the Norwegian company 3D Radar; and what the (a) agenda and (b) outcome was of each such meeting. 
Peter Luff: Since January 2008 Ministry of Defence officials have met 3D Radar on the following dates:
24 June 2009
20 October 2009
1 December 2009
18 January 2010
6 May 2010
29 June 2010
30 June 2010
The meetings primarily outlined and clarified the requirement for Ground Penetrating Radar, discussed arrangements for the assessment trials and clarified project time scales. I am withholding details of the outcomes of the meetings as these are commercially sensitive.
Kris Hopkins: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which companies manufacture the (a) battlefield clothing and (b) boots worn by British troops serving in Afghanistan. 
Peter Luff: The Department's relationship is with the prime contractor, who may choose to subcontract out some or all of the manufacturing work. The current prime contractors of battlefield clothing and combat boots used by British troops serving in Afghanistan are shown in the following table:
|Type of battlefield clothing||Prime contractor/supplier|
Standard battlefield clothing (known as Combat Soldier 95) and also socks
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the two year contract extension awarded by his Department to Purple Food Service Solutions includes a requirement for them to procure
British bacon for the armed forces; what discussions he had with the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on the terms of the contract; and if he will make a statement. 
Peter Luff: Under the Ministry of Defence (MOD)'s Food Supply contract the prime contractor, Purple Food Service Solutions, sources the majority of pig meat products from British suppliers, although bacon is currently sourced from other EU suppliers. This is because when the requirement was originally competed in accordance with EU and MOD procurement regulations British suppliers were unable to demonstrate sufficient value for money for supplying bacon.
While no specific discussions about the terms of the Food Supply contract have been held with officials from the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (DEFRA), informal discussions about the sourcing of bacon from non-UK sources have taken place during regular and routine meetings held between MOD and other Government Departments, including DEFRA. These discussions are aimed at assisting British companies to better compete for MOD food contracts.
Mr Llwyd: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will require armed services personnel to receive a psychological assessment immediately prior to leaving the services. 
Mr Robathan: All armed forces personnel receive a discharge medical assessment 90 days prior to discharge. This detailed examination is undertaken by a doctor and the results are recorded on the individual's F-Med-1 form. This form contains a specific assessment of the mental capacity and emotional stability of the individual. A reassessment is carried out seven days prior to discharge to confirm the record or reflect any further changes.
A summary of each individual's medical history while in the armed forces, including the results of the discharge medical, is recorded on an F-Med-133 form which is given to the individual to pass on to their civilian general practitioner (GP). The F-Med-133 also contains information on how the GP can gain access to the individual's complete service medical records if required.
The Government take mental health issues extremely seriously, and our Programme for Government makes clear that we will provide extra support for service and ex-service personnel. The Prime Minister has asked the hon. Member for South West Wiltshire (Dr Murrison) to carry out a study into the health of both serving and ex-service personnel to see what more can be done to assess and meet these needs; a focus of this study will be mental health.
Robert Halfon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of his Department's expenditure on (a) organisation of and (b) attendance at conferences in each year since 1997. 
Mr Robathan: This information is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will take steps to relocate officials working in his Department from central London to Bassetlaw. 
Mr Robathan: The location of public sector activity and plans for the Government's estate will be considered alongside other public spending issues over the course of the Spending Review.
Graham Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much (a) his Department and (b) its agencies and non-departmental public bodies spent on hospitality in each year since 1997. 
Mr Robathan: Expenditure on official entertainment has been as follows:
These figures represent expenditure by the Department, the on-Vote Defence Agencies and those advisory non-departmental public bodies we sponsor.
The figures do not include expenditure by our Trading Funds as they lie outside the departmental accounting boundary.
We have published this information in our annual report and accounts since 2001-02. The 2009-10 figures for both administration and programme entertainment are intended for publication in the annual report and accounts due to be laid before the House on 21 July.
We use official entertainment to pursue British security policy interests, facilitate a wider public understanding of the armed forces, and enhance professional contacts within the UK and with other nations. Expenditure must be modest and necessary, and all entertainment must be authorised in advance and comply with departmental rules and the principles of propriety.
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department spent on postage in 2009. 
Peter Luff: This information is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. As with all items of expenditure, what we spend on postage must be necessary, appropriate, cost effective and an admissible charge to public funds.
Diana R. Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment he has made of the effects of the Typhoon Fighter programme on the UK's core military aerospace capability. 
Peter Luff: The Strategic Defence and Security Review will define the future shape and role of the armed forces and the equipment that they will need. It would be inappropriate to single out Typhoon for further comment at this stage.
Diana R. Johnson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his assessment is of the effects of maintaining a UK production line for the Typhoon Fighter on UK exports; and what account will be taken of this matter in the strategic defence and security review. 
Peter Luff: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave her on 28 June 2010, Official Report, column 367W. Sovereign industrial implications will be considered as part of the Strategic Defence and Security Review, and wider industrial issues will be considered in the subsequent review of the Defence Industrial Strategy.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence who attended the National Defence Industries Council meeting on 21 June 2010; and in what capacity each such person attended. 
Peter Luff: The National Defence Industries Council (NDIC) is the most senior forum for consultation between the Government and industry on defence matters. The Government members are Ministers and senior officials from relevant Government Departments. The industry members of the NDIC are individuals from defence companies or trade association representatives nominated by the Defence Industries Council (DIC). More details about the DIC are available on its website at:
Present at the meeting on 21 June were:
|Ministry of Defence|
Chief Operating Officer, Defence Equipment and Support (representing Chief of Defence Materiel)
|Department for Business, Innovation and Skills|
|UK Trade and Investment|
Head of UK Trade and Investment, Defence and Security Organisation
General Secretary Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions
Vice President Defence and Security, Intellect trade association
Vice President Defence, Aerospace Defence Security trade association
Also present at the meeting were other members of the NDIC secretariat, private secretaries, and other officials.
Thomas Docherty: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which companies have been awarded contracts and sub-contracts for construction of HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales; at which sites he expects work under each such contract; and what the monetary value is of each such contract. 
Peter Luff: Following the signing of the Queen Elizabeth (QE) Class Aircraft Carrier contract in July 2008, construction work is now under way at six UK shipyards: Appledore, Birkenhead, Govan, Portsmouth, Rosyth and Tyne.
Over 100 equipment sub-contracts, totalling some £1.25 billion, have been placed by the Aircraft Carrier Alliance to support the build of the QE Class. A detailed list of these sub-contracts will be placed in the Library of the House.
Thomas Docherty: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate his Department has made of the number of people directly working on the construction of HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales. 
Peter Luff: It is anticipated that work on the Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers will create or sustain a peak of 7,000 to 8,000 jobs at the Tier 1 shipyards in Glasgow, Rosyth, Portsmouth and Devon, with a further 2,000 to 3,000 in the supply chain across the UK. Construction and commissioning work is due to complete by the end of 2018.
Current employment figures can be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many Type 23 frigates are equipped with 2087-equipped Sonar; and whether these ships are providing the capability formerly undertaken by the Nimrod MR.2. 
Peter Luff: Six Type 23s are currently equipped with 2087 Sonar, and we plan to fit a further two with it by 2013.
Following the withdrawal from service of the Nimrod MR2, other assets, including the Type 23, are providing cover for some of its tasks.
Mr Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what priorities she has set for research and development expenditure on encouraging the development of anaerobic digesters. 
Richard Benyon: DEFRA and Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) Ministers jointly chaired an anaerobic digestion round table on 6 July. They discussed with stakeholders what actions the Government need to take to realise the coalition commitment to an increase in anaerobic digestion, and how this can be achieved in a cost-effective way. A note of the meeting summarising the issues raised and potential actions will be circulated to interested parties shortly. DECC and DEFRA will be jointly drawing up an action plan over the summer, looking at the economic capacity for the anaerobic digestion industry and the steps to be taken by Government and industry to realise the increase.
Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what plans she has for the future of the Countryside Quality Counts project; whether she plans to maintain the public availability of the Countryside Quality Counts results currently available on the Countryside Quality Counts website; and if she will make a statement. 
Richard Benyon: Natural England is committed to continuing the Countryside Quality Counts (CQC) Project and plans to publish a third assessment of change in countryside quality in 2012. This will cover the period 2004-09.
Natural England has been exploring options for a related but improved project that better reflects the Government's needs. This has resulted in the development of the CQuEL (Character and Quality of England's Landscapes) Project.
In line with the coalition's policy to reduce the number of Government sponsored websites, the CQC website:
has been identified as a candidate for closure. However, Natural England has arranged for the site to be transferred to the National Archive.
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what training has been provided for Ministers in her Department since the formation of the present administration; and at what cost. 
Richard Benyon: No training has been provided.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether her Department plans to organise a floods summit in 2010. 
Richard Benyon: DEFRA is planning to hold a floods summit in September.
Dr Thérèse Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will undertake a review of the effectiveness of the Gangmasters Licensing Authority; and if she will make a statement. 
Mr Paice: DEFRA, in common with all Government Departments, is currently taking steps to review all of its arm's length bodies. This includes the Gangmasters Licensing Authority.
Stephen Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of local authority recycling rates for (a) domestic and (b) commercial food waste in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Richard Benyon: We have made no estimate of the local authority recycling rates for domestic and commercial food waste.
English local authorities do submit data to an online survey called WasteDataFlow, setting out the amount of food waste collected separately and in mixed food/garden waste for recycling.
The most recent quarter for which data are available is July to September 2009.
In this period, 40 authorities reported having collected a total of 19,590.21 tonnes of food waste in source-segregated (food waste only) collections from households.
In the same period, 44 authorities reported having collected a total of 134,874.67 tonnes of mixed food/garden waste from households. The bulk of this in most cases would be garden waste rather than food waste.
Where food waste is collected by local authorities from non-household sources (which would include any collected from commercial sources), seven authorities reported having collected 296.75 tonnes of food waste in total.
Huw Irranca-Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what reports she has received on the decision of the International Whaling Commission to hold part of the proceedings of its 62nd meeting in Morocco in private; and if she will make a statement. 
Richard Benyon: I have not received any reports on the decision to hold part of the IWC proceedings of the 62nd meeting in private.
The UK generally opposes holding IWC proceedings in private. However, following the impasse that occurred on the discussion of the IWC reform in the open forum, on this occasion we reluctantly agreed to ensure all negotiating options were exhausted.
We would not wish this type of meeting adopted as a standard procedure in the future, but nonetheless, we ensured the EU maintained our strong pro-conservation stance throughout.
Huw Irranca-Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether she expressed to her Japanese counterpart the Government's policy on the commercial fishing of dolphins and porpoises at the 62nd annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission in Morocco in June 2010. 
Richard Benyon: The UK opposes all forms of dolphin and porpoise drives and believe they cause unacceptable levels of suffering. At the recent annual meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC) in June, 2010 (IWC62) the UK urged members to support the conservation of small cetaceans.
The Japanese Government are in no doubt of the strength of feeling in the country about these hunts and the UK Government will continue to make their opposition to the hunting of small cetaceans known to Japan at every appropriate opportunity and argue that they undermine the credibility of the IWC as an effective organisation for the conservation of cetacean stocks worldwide.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland which Ministers in his Department have used an allocated ministerial car to travel between the Department and the House of Commons on each day since 21 May 2010. 
David Mundell: The Ministerial Code sets out use of official cars. Paragraph 10.12 states that Ministers are permitted to use an official car for official business and for home to office journeys within a reasonable distance of London on the understanding that they would normally be carrying classified papers on which they would be working.
All travel is undertaken in accordance with the Ministerial Code.
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Scotland what representations he has received on the effects of the proposed value added tax increase on public services in Scotland. 
Michael Moore: The Budget was discussed in a recent HM Treasury and Scotland Office seminar, with participants from the public sector, as well as Scottish business organisations, financial services and academia. Other representations have been received on a range of Budget issues. The VAT rise is unavoidable if this Government are to tackle the inherited budget deficit, which is the largest in peacetime history. Failure to address the deficit could see higher interest rates and no real recovery.
Angela Smith: To ask the Leader of the House which (a) (i) civil servants and (ii) special advisers in his Office and (b) other individuals are employed to write speeches for each Minister in his Office. 
Sir George Young: Ministerial speeches are drafted on a collaborative basis, which includes advice from civil servants and the Leader of the House of Commons' special adviser.
Priti Patel: To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, answering for the House of Commons Commission if the House of Commons Commission will take steps to increase the number of places available for educational visits by school parties to the Palace of Westminster; and if he will ensure that hon. Members elected at the most recent general election are able to arrange visits for schools in their constituencies in 2010. 
Sir Stuart Bell: There are two routes commonly taken by school parties wishing to visit Parliament. They may either contact Parliament's Education Service directly to book onto its regular visit and workshop programme, or contact their constituency MP who can sponsor a tour organised through the Central Tours Office (CTO). Both services are heavily oversubscribed.
Member-sponsored tours take place when Parliament is sitting. The CTO opens booking for Member-sponsored tours six months in advance; the number of tours available is limited by the sitting times of both Houses. Currently, there is some availability in October, November and December 2010.
Education Service visits to Parliament are booked in advance on a term by term basis; schools book direct with the Education Service and are used to this practice. All available visits generally book up on the day they are released. Visits between April and July 2010 were booked in January 2010, and visits between September and December 2010 were booked in April 2010. There are currently over 16,000 young people with confirmed bookings for education visits in the remainder of 2010. The next booking date is 6 October 2010, when places on the visit programme between January and March 2011 will become available. The bookings line number is 0207 219 4496. Full details of the education visits programme and the booking process can be found on the Education Service website at:
Unfortunately, with the accommodation currently available to the Education Service, it cannot meet the existing demand from schools, despite the substantial increase in capacity in recent years (up from 11,000 in 2005-06 to 40,000 in 2009-10). In the last Parliament, the House of Commons Administration Committee's report "Improving Facilities for Educational Visitors to Parliament" published in April 2007, recommended that a dedicated space for school visitors should be provided, and this is now in the Works programme. It is envisaged that the planned Education Centre would allow an increase in the number of places available on education visits to 100,000 per year from 2013.
Robert Halfon: To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities what estimate she has made of the expenditure of the Government Equalities Office on (a) organisation of and (b) attendance at conferences in each year since its creation. 
Lynne Featherstone: The Government Equalities Office does not hold information split between holding and attending conferences. However the total spend since inception was as follows:
|Financial year||Conference expenditure (£000)|
|(1)( )12 October 2007 to 31 March 2008|
Philip Davies: To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities how much the Government Equalities Office has spent (a) in total and (b) on staff costs on promoting equality and diversity in each of the last three years for which figures are available; and how many people are employed by the Government Equalities Office for this purpose. 
Lynne Featherstone: The expenditure of the Government Equalities Office has fallen over the last three years from £83 million to £69 million. The detail is shown in the following table:
The Government Equalities Office grant to NDPBs includes an element related to Human Rights.
For 2010-11 the Government Equalities Office contributed £9 million to deficit reduction.
All of the Government Equalities Office staff is employed on promoting equality and diversity.
Ian Austin: To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities what estimate has been made of the cost to the public purse of travel she has undertaken in an official capacity in (a) May 2010 and (b) June 2010. 
Lynne Featherstone: My right hon. Friend the Minister for Women and Equalities is also the Home Secretary. In her ministerial capacity as Minister for Women and Equalities, she did not incur any additional travel expenses.
Caroline Flint: To ask the Minister for Women and Equalities whether she plans to bring forward proposals for secondary legislation to implement gender pay audits. 
Lynne Featherstone: The coalition agreement makes clear the Government's commitment to promote equal pay and to take a range of measures to end discrimination in the workplace.
There is currently no power in law which could be used to impose full gender pay audits on employers by means of secondary legislation. Section 78 of the Equality Act 2010 contains a power to require employers to publish information relating to the pay of employees in order to show whether there are differences in the pay of male and female employees, with regard to factors that would have to be specified in the secondary legislation. But this power would not allow the imposition of full gender pay audits. In particular, it would not allow regulations to be made that require the prescribed information to be analysed to establish the causes of any pay gaps identified.
We are currently considering our next steps in respect of equal pay, and we will make an announcement in due course.
Mr Lammy: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport when he expects to reply to the letter from the right hon. Member for Tottenham of 27 May 2010 on betting shops in Tottenham constituency. 
Mr Jeremy Hunt: I have asked my Department to respond to correspondence within 48 hours and I apologise that this has not happened in this instance, due to an administrative error in my Department. A response was sent on 8 July 2010.
Graham Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport how much (a) his Department and (b) its agency and non-departmental public bodies spent on website design in each year since 1997. 
John Penrose: Prior to 2000, this Department's website site was developed in-house at no cost. In 2000 £81,134 was spent on redevelopment of a new website and a portion of this was for design, though exact figures are not available. Changes to the design in 2005 cost £31,104.54. In 2009-10 the site was redesigned as part of essential work to bring the structure and content up to date, improve accessibility and allow the use of social media feeds (which the previous site could not support). The total cost for design was £8,383.75.
Information on the amount spent on website designs by the DCMS agency and arm's length bodies is held by them and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.
Graham Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport how much his (a) Department and (b) its agency and non-departmental public bodies spent on logo design in each year since 1997. 
John Penrose: In 1997 this Department spent £26,000 for the production of a new logo and to develop new documents and stationery.
In 2006 a brand refresh was needed to include comprehensive brand guidelines covering all marketing applications as well as document templates. The cost was £24,315.
Information on our agency and arm's length bodies' spend on logo designs is held by them, and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Mr Blunkett: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport pursuant to the written ministerial statement of 26 May 2010, Official Report, columns 2-3WS, on savings (2010-11), under what budgetary headings the £88 million of savings allocated to his Department will be made. 
Mr Jeremy Hunt: The majority of arm's length bodies had their budgets reduced by 3%. The £88 million of savings were made from the following institutions. Each body is responsible individually for determining from which of its internal budget headings to take the savings.
|Institution||Saving (£ million)|
The Department itself is meeting its share of savings by reducing its administrative expenditure (mainly: travel and subsistence-including ministerial cars, consultancy, training, and publicity); elements of pay budget e.g. overtime; grants it makes to other institutions and programmes; and its own capital expenditure (mainly software upgrades).
Mr Anderson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport which of his Department's regulations are under review; and if he will make a statement. 
John Penrose: In the Budget the Government announced plans for reducing the regulatory burdens on business, including the introduction of a one-in-one out system for new regulations and a fundamental review of all regulation inherited from the previous Government scheduled for introduction over the coming year. These regulations will not be implemented until they have been reviewed and re-agreed by the Reducing Regulation Cabinet Committee.
As part of a wider review of employment law, the Department will also be reviewing laws within relevant policy areas to "ensure they maximise flexibility for both parties while protecting fairness and providing the competitive environment required for enterprise to thrive".
launched by the Deputy Prime Minister on 1 July 2010, will also give members of the public the opportunity to suggest existing regulations for removal, in order to reduce the burden on business.
Angela Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport which (a) (i) civil servants and (ii) special advisers in his Department and (b) other individuals are employed to write speeches for each Minister in his Department. 
John Penrose: One civil servant is employed to write speeches for Ministers on departmental business.
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport if he will estimate the cost to his Department of compliance with regulations arising from EU obligations in the last 12 months. 
Mr Jeremy Hunt: A considered estimate of the cost to this Department from complying with EU regulations and obligations could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Mr Lammy: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what estimate he has made of the number of fixed odds betting terminals in operation in bookmakers. 
John Penrose: The Gambling Commission's industry statistics for 2008-09 include a British Amusement Catering Trade Association (BACTA) estimate for the number of gaming machines available to the public as at 31 March 2009. For B2s, this was approximately 27,500.
A full breakdown of these statistics can be found on page 11 at:
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport pursuant to the answer of 1 July 2010, Official Report, column 602W,
on gambling, whether he discussed fixed odds betting terminals in High Street bookmakers when he met the Chair of the Responsible Gambling Strategy Board on 3 June 2010. 
John Penrose: A range of issues relating to the research, education and treatment of problem gambling in the UK were discussed at my meeting with Baroness Julia Neuberger.
There was no formal agenda for the meeting, but I can confirm that a variety of gambling activities, including Fixed Odds Betting Terminals (FOBTs), were included within that general discussion.
Mr Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport what proportion of the net proceeds from the disposal of the Tote he plans to return to horse racing organisations. 
John Penrose: As I said in response to my hon. Friend's question on 1 July 2010, Official Report, column 603W, the Government are currently considering a range of options for the future of the Tote with the aim of securing value for the taxpayer while recognising the support the Tote currently provides the racing industry.
Given the sensitive nature of the discussions I am afraid I cannot add any more to those comments at this stage, but the Government will announce how they intend to proceed as soon as possible.
Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport whether proposals will be invited for the opening and closing ceremonies for the 2012 Olympics to include items featuring Britain's traditional folk culture; and if he will make a statement. 
Hugh Robertson: The London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) is working hard to scope the ambition of the ceremonies, and will consider a range of options that reflect and celebrate our unique British values and culture.
Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Olympics, Media and Sport (1) what assessment he has made of the likely legacy for the Metropolitan Borough of Dudley and its residents from the London 2012 Olympics; and if he will make a statement; 
(2) what steps his Department has taken to ensure that cities and towns (a) outside London and (b) in the West Midlands will benefit from the London 2012 Olympics. 
The Government and the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) established the Nations and Regions Group to ensure UK-wide engagement and to maximise the legacy from London 2012. This group works directly with representatives from each of
the nations and English regions to realise the sporting, economic, and cultural benefits of the 2012 games.
I have not made an assessment of the specific legacy for Dudley. However, the West Midlands stands to gain from the wide range of opportunities created by the 2012 games, through businesses winning games-related work, increased tourism and cultural celebrations. Some examples of how cities and towns outside London and, in particular the West Midlands, are benefitting from the games are given as follows.
Across the UK over 118,000 companies have registered on Competefor (the website where London 2012 contract opportunities are advertised) and over 1,100 contracts have been awarded to Competefor suppliers. Information on businesses in the West Midlands that have directly supplied the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) is available in the business section of the London 2012 website under the heading ODA Suppliers, where you will be able to find suppliers listed by venue and sector:
The City of Coventry football stadium will be one of the key non-London venues, hosting football matches, and along with pre-games training camps will provide an opportunity to create further economic benefits, including inward investment, through the international attention that will follow. In the West Midlands there are 32 facilities that met the criteria to be world-class training venues for Olympic and Paralympic sport, which are included in the official London 2012 Pre-Games Training Camp Guide. The guide has been produced in an online form and is accessible at:
Over 620 cultural and sporting programmes across the UK have been awarded Inspire Marks, including 32 in the West Midlands. Over 13,000 schools/colleges across the UK have registered for LOCOG's education programme Get Set, including 1,115 schools/colleges in the West Midlands-41% of the total number in the region.
The West Midlands has also secured £2.2 million from the Legacy Trust to fund programmes in the region, bringing people together for community activities of all kinds.
Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what his most recent assessment is of the human rights situation in China. 
Mr Jeremy Browne: The Government have serious concerns about a wide range of human rights issues including the extensive use of the death penalty and detention without trial; the use of torture; the continuing harassment of political dissidents, religious practitioners and adherents of the Falun Gong movement; and severe restrictions on basic rights such as freedom of speech and association. The Government note that China has made good progress on economic and social rights in the last 30 years, bringing more people out of poverty than any country in history.
The Government attach high importance to human rights in China and would like to see much more rapid progress on civil and political rights, not least because that will help to sustain China's economic development. We encourage China to set a timetable for ratifying the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights as soon as possible. We continue to raise human rights concerns as part of our dialogue with China.
Sir Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if he will place in the Library a copy of the foreign bribery briefing document provided by his Department to outgoing commercial officers. 
Mr Bellingham: Outgoing commercial officers receive training on dealing with bribery and corruption at Post. This is delivered by the Anti Corruption Unit in the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, and covers the current UK law, officers' obligations under the law, and sources of support and information available to them and to businesses.
In addition, all officers at our overseas Posts have access to an online anti-corruption toolkit. This offers a wide range of guidance on dealing with bribery and corruption while overseas. It includes sections on:
UK legislation relating to bribery and corruption,
how, when and to whom officers should report allegations or suspicions of bribery or corruption by UK businesses or individuals,
how to deal with allegations of corruption by UK officials,
encouraging reporting by members of UK companies or organisations overseas, and
advice to business.
The advice to business section includes guidance for officers on how to advise UK companies on managing the risks of overseas corruption, including best practice on key issues such as:
bribe solicitation, extortion and duress,
so-called 'facilitation payments',
gifts and hospitality,
third party partners, and
a list of additional resources companies can refer to on bribery and corruption issues.
A standard script for business is included in this section, giving details of sources of further support and guidance for businesses concerned about bribery and corruption issues as follows.
An annual e-gram on bribery and corruption is sent to all our Posts, for the attention of all officers, outlining the current UK law, officers' obligations under the law, and sources of support and information available to them and to businesses. This e-gram also forms part of the anti-corruption toolkit.
With the exception of the script for business, the toolkit and other documents mentioned have been designed for use by Foreign and Commonwealth and UK Trade and Investment (UKTI) officers. It is not therefore appropriate to place them in the Library, but I would be happy to forward a copy to you for your personal information if you so wished.
Further information is available to both officers and businesses through the Overseas Security Information for Business service, hosted by the UKTI website. This provides UK business with country-specific information relating to the security related risks, including bribery and corruption risks, which companies face when operating overseas.
Foreign bribery is a business risk that needs to be actively managed, like fraud or embezzlement. Corruption adds up to 10% to the total cost of doing business globally, and up to 25% to the cost of procurement contracts in developing countries. Moving business from a country with low corruption levels to a country with medium or high corruption levels is found to add costs equivalent to a 20% tax on foreign business.
There are a lot of useful, free resources available to help businesses manage this risk. For example, as part of the Government's efforts to support business integrity, the UK is funding the Business Anti-Corruption Portal, which is of particular use to Small and Medium Enterprises(1), providing summaries of international studies and knowledge about particularly exposed markets, sectors and regions.
One of the first steps in managing the risk of bribery is for a company to implement a robust anti-bribery policy through training and disciplinary procedures. A clear and consistent message from the top is the essential core of successful anti-corruption policy, backed up by a robust internal audit programme. Recent enforcement action against UK companies has demonstrated that companies need to look beyond written corporate policy, to ensure effective implementation and monitoring.
There are a number of business guides for designing and implementing an anti-corruption policy, such as Transparency International's Business Principles(2) and the International Chamber of Commerce's Rules of Conduct(3). A number of industry sectors have also developed sector specific guides, specialist codes of practice and transparent procurement agreements(4).
UK exporters and investors should also ensure that their management control systems meet international standards for anti-corruption. The Government encourages UK businesses to follow the voluntary OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises(5), which includes specific anti-corruption guidelines. Companies should also consider additional due diligence when engaging foreign agents or operating in weak governance zones(6).
The Government is aware that petty corruption and bribe solicitation remain a problem for UK exporters and overseas investors. The best defence against bribe solicitation and demands for 'facilitation payments' is good preparation and participation in local integrity pacts or other anti-corruption initiatives. There is also a growing body of specialised anti-corruption risk management for these problems, including international initiatives such as RESIST(7) (Resisting Extortion and Solicitation in International Transactions).
Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) how much funding he expects to be allocated to his Department's counter-terrorism and counter-radicalisation programmes in Pakistan in financial year 2010-11; 
(2) what percentage of his Department's counter-terrorism and counter-radicalisation programmes is projected to be spent in Yemen in 2010-11; 
(3) what percentage of Counter-Terrorism and Radicalisation Programme funding is planned to be spent in (a) Pakistan, (b) Afghanistan, (c) Saudi Arabia and (d) East Africa in 2010-11. 
Alistair Burt: Due to the sensitive nature of counter-terrorism projects, we cannot provide details of the exact amounts allocated to projects in specific countries under the Counter-Terrorism and Radicalisation Programme.
Graham Evans: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how much his Department spent on catering in each year from 1997 to 2009. 
Alistair Burt: We cannot separate out catering costs from wider official hospitality expenses without incurring disproportionate cost.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs which Ministers in his Department have used an allocated Ministerial car to travel between his Department and the House of Commons on each day since 21 May 2010. 
Alistair Burt: I refer the hon. Member to the answer my hon. Friend the Minister for Europe gave to the hon. Member for West Bromwich East (Mr Watson) on 8 June, Official Report, column 100W. Ministers prefer to walk. Sometimes lack of time, or the need to take large files, means they have to travel by car. All travel is undertaken in accordance with the Ministerial Code.
Gordon Banks: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (1) how many of his Department's contracts with its suppliers are under review as a result of the recently announced reductions in public expenditure; and what the monetary value is of all such contracts which are under review; 
(2) how many officials in his Department are working on renegotiating contracts for the supply of goods and services to the Department as a result of recently announced reductions in public spending; what savings are expected to accrue to his Department from such renegotiations; how much expenditure his Department will incur on such renegotiations; and when such renegotiations will be completed. 
Alistair Burt: The Foreign and Commonwealth (FCO) operates a policy of continually reviewing its contracts, taking the opportunity to renegotiate contracts in accordance with EU directives, achieving efficiency savings where possible.
This current review of FCO contracts is being led by the Office of Government Commerce (OGC), now part of the Cabinet Office, on behalf of central Government.
At this time the FCO, like other central Government Departments, is taking the lead from OGC as to the suppliers and contracts that may be subject to review and renegotiation. We are unclear at present as to which FCO contracts may be affected by this programme of renegotiation, so accordingly cannot identify the expected savings or the expenditure the Department will incur.
Mr Blunkett: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs pursuant to the written ministerial statement of 26 May 2010, Official Report, columns 2-3WS, on savings (2010-11), under what budgetary headings the £55 million of savings allocated to his Department will be made. 
Alistair Burt: I refer the right hon. Member to the reply given to the hon. Member for North Durham (Mr Jones) on 7 June 2010, Official Report, columns 23-4W and the written ministerial statement issued by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State on 29 June 2010, Official Report, columns 37-8WS.
Mrs McGuire: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent discussions he has had with his Israeli counterpart on relaxing the restrictions on border crossings with the Gaza Strip. 
Alistair Burt: We are in regular contact and dialogue with the Israeli Government, on a number of matters related to the middle east peace process-this includes the current humanitarian situation in Gaza.
We have made clear that the situation in Gaza is a tragedy and unsustainable. Together with the EU and Quartet, we have called on Israel to ease restrictions on access and enable a return to economic normality. I therefore welcomed Israel's decision to move from a list of 120 permitted goods to a list of specific prohibited items.
It is now imperative that all parties work together urgently to deliver real change on the ground.
David Miliband: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how much has been spent from his Department's overseas counter-terrorism budget for 2010-11. 
Mr Hague: The budget for the Counter-Terrorism and Radicalisation Programme for 2010-11 has been set at £38 million. Breaking down this budget further could reveal our capabilities and details of the security and intelligence agencies spending. It has been the policy of successive Governments not to reveal these details. All expenditure is kept under rigorous scrutiny to ensure value for money and effectiveness and is incurred in accordance with the principles of Managing Public Money and the Treasury handbook on Regularity and Propriety.
David Miliband: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs how much he expects to be spent from the Counter-Terrorism and Radicalisation Programme budget in Pakistan in 2010-11. 
Mr Hague: Due to the sensitive nature of counter-terrorism projects, we cannot provide details of the exact amounts allocated to projects in specific countries under the Counter-Terrorism and Radicalisation Programme.
Mr Slaughter: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations he has made to the government of Israel on the three British citizens arrested on board the Gaza Freedom Flotilla who were returned to the UK without their passports. 
Alistair Burt: I raised this issue with Israel's ambassador to the UK. Our ambassador to Israel and other members of our embassy in Tel Aviv also raised the matter on a number of occasions with the Israeli authorities. It has also been raised by the EU presidency, on behalf of EU heads of mission, with the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. I can confirm we have received all three missing passports which are being returned to the holders.
Mr Slaughter: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps his Department has taken to secure the return of the property confiscated from British citizens on board the Gaza Freedom Flotilla by the Israeli authorities. 
Alistair Burt: We have raised these specific issues with Israel's ambassador to the UK. Our ambassador to Israel and other members of our embassy in Tel Aviv have also raised the matter on a number of occasions with the Israeli authorities. It has also been raised by the EU presidency, on behalf of EU heads of mission, with the Israeli Ministry of Foreign Affairs. We, and the EU, have been informed by the Israelis that, with the exception of electronic and media equipment, the personal belongings have now been sent to Turkey, to the organisers of the Flotilla, Insan Hak ve Hürriyetleri ve Insani Yardim Vakfi-The Foundation for Human Rights and Freedoms and Humanitarian Relief (IHH). We understand that the Turkish authorities agree this to be correct. We have been informed by the Israeli authorities that the return of electronic and media equipment is under consideration by the Israeli defence forces. We will continue to press for its return and availability for use in the inquiry, as required by those conducting it.
Although we are not legally obliged to pursue either legal action, or to seek the return of a British national's property, nor is it part of our consular assistance policy to do so, exceptionally in this case, we have asked our consular staff in Istanbul to follow up with IHH who still hold over 300 pieces of unclaimed luggage, including watches, phones and cameras. Our consular staff have taken photographs of everything that was seen in IHH's storage, which we will shortly be distributing to the British nationals involved so they can attempt to identify any property that is theirs.
David Miliband: To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what budget has been set for his Department's overseas counter-terrorism programme in 2010-11. 
Mr Hague: I refer to the answer the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, my hon. Friend the Member for North East Bedfordshire (Alistair Burt) gave the hon. Member for Denton and Reddish (Andrew Gwynne) on 7 July 2010, Official Report, column 312W.
Andrew Selous: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport (1) if he will place in the Library a copy of the contract for the Luton Dunstable busway project; 
(2) pursuant to the answer of 5 July 2010, Official Report, columns 5-6W, on bus services: Luton, whether the contract for the Luton Dunstable busway project contained a cancellation clause. 
Norman Baker [holding answer 12 July 2010]: The Department for Transport has not seen and does not hold a copy of the contract between Luton borough council and BAM Nuttall in respect of the Luton Dunstable Busway project. I suggest that the hon. Member contacts the council to obtain a copy.
Dr Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what studies his Department has undertaken of Chesterton station to decide whether it should be included in the High Level Output Specification for Control Period 5. 
Mrs Villiers [holding answer 12 July 2010]: The Department for Transport has worked with Cambridgeshire county council and Network Rail to assess the scheme for a possible station at Chesterton. The county council are considering funding options. No decisions have yet been made over the Control Period 5 High Level Output Specification, which covers the five-year period from April 2014 to March 2019.
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what discussions he has had with Ministerial colleagues on the access to roads for (a) cyclists and (b) the public during competitive cycling races. 
Mike Penning: The Secretary of State for Transport has had no discussions with ministerial colleagues on the access to roads for cyclists and the public during competitive cycling races.
Jackie Doyle-Price: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which projects his Department has funded for improvements to the Dartford crossing since 2000; and what the total cost was of each project on the latest date for which figures are available. 
Mike Penning: The following table sets out Highways Agency improvements projects from April 2003 to September 2009. They include all expenditure including technology renewals, but exclude maintenance and renewals activities. Details of improvements before April 2003 can be provided only at disproportionate cost.
|Project description||Expenditure (£)|
Layout of the North-Bound Entry to the East Tunnel as a Contingency for a Tunnel Closure
Automatic Fire Suppression and Detection Improvements (East and West Tunnels)
Installation of Speed Detection Equipment and Cameras (Queen Elizabeth II Bridge)
Motorway Incident Detection and Automatic Signage Installation (Junction 2 to 30)
Information Technology Developments for Dart-Tag and Toll Booths
National Motorway Communications System and Variable Messaging System Upgrade
Motorway Incident Detection and Automatic Signage (Junction 30 to Plaza)
Improvements from Junction 1A to Queen Elizabeth II Bridge Accident Cluster
Motorway Incident Detection and Automatic Signage (MIDAS) Installation
Road Accident Safety Improvements (Queen Elizabeth II Bridge Approach)
Network Referencing System and Installation (Signage and Marker Posts in Tunnels)
Road Accident Safety Improvements (Queen Elizabeth II Bridge and Approach)
Jackie Doyle-Price: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will assess the merits of levying tolls in one direction only in order to increase capacity at the Dartford crossing. 
Mike Penning: The Department for Transport and the Highways Agency are committed to improving the levels of service experienced by the millions of users of the Dartford crossing.
Previous studies recommended further investigation of measures to provide short and longer-term improvements to the performance of the crossing:
through better traffic management, better design of the tolling plaza and newer tolling technologies.
the possibility of one-way tolling.
the case for the provision of additional crossing capacity in the longer-term.
However, we will need to be clear of the potential benefits and impacts such proposals will bring, and will want to understand the potential implementation costs.
My priority when considering of the options for improvements to the Dartford crossing is the investigation of the use of newer charging technology to allow the introduction of free-flow charging, where I have asked for further advice from officials on the costs, possible funding sources and benefits of options for the use of such technologies.
Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether he plans to relocate (a) civil servants and (b) Government bodies for which his Department is responsible (i) out of London and (ii) to the West Midlands; and if he will make a statement. 
Norman Baker: The location of public sector activity and plans for the Government's estate will be considered alongside other public spending issues over the course of the spending review.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which Ministers in his Department have used an allocated ministerial car to travel between the Department and the House of Commons on each day since 21 May 2010. 
Mike Penning: I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 2 June 2010, Official Report, column 6W. All travel is undertaken in accordance with the Ministerial Code.
Ian Austin: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what his estimate is of the mileage travelled by each Minister in his Department in a Government car in (a) May and (b) June 2010. 
Mike Penning: Departments are unable to estimate the mileage travelled by each Minister in a Government car in May and June 2010 because this information is not recorded.
Mr Blunkett: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport pursuant to the written ministerial statement of 26 May 2010, Official Report, columns 2-3WS, on savings (2010-11), under what budgetary headings the £683 million of savings allocated to his Department will be made. 
Mr Philip Hammond: My Department will find £683 million of savings through:
a £309 million reduction in specific grants to local authorities;
a proposed £108 million reduction in the Department's grant to Transport for London, on which I am consulting with the Mayor of London;
Network Rail will reduce spend by £100 million; and
a further £112 million of savings in my Department's direct expenditure, including consultancy, research, travel and subsistence, IT, marketing and communications, training, agency staff, and office consumables.
While these efficiencies have taken my Department a long way to the total amount, the deferral of £54 million that would have been spent on lower priority schemes has also been necessary. This includes not going forward in 2010-11 with planned spend on some rail rolling stock schemes that have not already been contractualised. It also includes postponement of highways improvements on the A453, A23 and M6 junctions 5-8.
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what training has been provided for Ministers in his Department since the formation of the present administration; and at what cost. 
Norman Baker: The Under-Secretary of State for Transport, the hon. Member for Hemel Hempstead (Mike Penning), attended an Induction Workshop for new Ministers, run by the National School of Government (NSG). This is part of the NSG's core training and was provided at no additional cost to the Department.
No other Ministers have attended any formal training courses.
Dr Whitehead: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent estimate he has made of the annual (a) monetary value and (b) contribution to the economy of freight to and from the Port of Southampton. 
Mike Penning: None. The Department for Transport does not publish or collate statistics for individual ports in this form. However, figures for traffic through Southampton, which confirm its major importance for the economy, are available in table 3.8.44 of 'Maritime Statistics'. Provisional statistics for 2009 are also available. These show that in 2009 Southampton was the fifth largest port in the UK in terms of traffic handled. See web references:
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport how many call handlers are employed to operate the Highways Agency Information Line; and how many calls the line has received in the last 12 months. 
Mike Penning: 19 advisers (call handlers) cover 6 am to 10 pm seven days a week. Overnight calls are answered by national incident liaison officers as part of their other duties.
177,212 calls were received in the 12 month period ending 31 May 2010 and 38,281 e-mails were received and handled.
David Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans he has for the future of the M54 to M6 toll road link; and if he will make a statement. 
Mike Penning: The Government have made clear their most urgent priority is to tackle the UK's record budget deficit in order to restore confidence in the economy and support the economy.
Ministers are therefore reviewing all Department for Transport projects and programmes as part of the spending review to ensure they represent good value for money and are consistent with the Government's objectives. I am unable to comment further on specific schemes until the spending review has been concluded.
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps the Government plan to take to reduce litter on motorways; and if he will make a statement. 
Mike Penning: The responsibility for clearance of highway litter and the sweeping of carriageways is governed by the Environmental Protection Act 1990. The Highways Agency is responsible for litter collections on motorways in England and these are undertaken by the Agency's service providers, who are required under their contracts to meet the standards set out in the Act.
The Agency is continuing to work to identify ways to reduce litter on motorways. It is focused on delivering reliable levels of service while optimising value for money. Areas which are being considered include collaborative working with local authorities and other key stakeholders, and improving interaction with customers on litter prevention, so that they are deterred from littering at all.
Mr Crausby: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what guidance his Department provides to Network Rail on responding to enquiries from hon. Members. 
As a company limited by guarantee, it is for Network Rail to decide how to respond to such requests. The Department for Transport does not currently provide guidance to Network Rail on this matter. However,
the Government are committed to ensuring that the company is properly accountable to its customers, passengers and others with a legitimate interest in its operations.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which of the alternative systems to the Intercity Express Programme (IEP) set out in the Review of the Intercity Express Programme, published on 7 July 2010 he plans to consider before the publication of the forthcoming Comprehensive Spending Review; and what criteria other than value for money he plans to use in assessing the merits of each system. 
Mrs Villiers: We will reassess the Intercity Express Programme and consider possible alternatives, such as refurbishment of existing rolling stock and the various different approaches recommended for investigation within Sir Andrew Foster's review of the programme. In accordance with Sir Andrew's recommendations, the Department for Transport will also engage more closely with industry.
All options will be appraised in line with standard value for money and affordability criteria.
Alison McGovern: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the expected completion date is for the electrification of the rail network between Liverpool and Leeds; and if he will make a statement. 
Mrs Villiers: The previous Government announced that the railway line between Liverpool and Manchester, via Newton-le-Willows, would be electrified by the end of 2013. There are no plans currently in place to electrify the line onwards to Leeds.
The Government support rail electrification as it helps to reduce carbon emissions and cut running costs. However, as part of the spending review process Ministers are considering the full range of transport policy to ascertain what is affordable.
Dr Whitehead: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport when he expects the Wessex rail route to reach capacity. 
Mrs Villiers: The Wessex rail route is operated by Network Rail and they make assessments of likely future use by train operators. Their 2010 Wessex Route Plan forecasts continuing growth in demand and puts forward measures to improve the effective use of capacity, but does not identify when the route will reach capacity. The Government are committed to long-term infrastructure investment which supports sustainable economic growth.
Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent assessment he has made of the effectiveness of (a) road humps and (b) other traffic calming measures as a means of reducing road traffic accidents; and if he will make a statement. 
Mike Penning: The Department for Transport has in the past carried out extensive road safety research covering a wide range of topics, including the development and evaluation of road humps and other traffic calming measures designed to reduce vehicle speeds and road accidents.
"Local Transport Note 1/07: Traffic Calming" summarises this research, including that into the effectiveness of road humps and traffic calming measures on accidents. It is available from the Department's website at:
Research has shown that reductions in speed will deliver safety benefits (for example a review undertaken for the Department)
This research shows that the most reliable way of achieving lower traffic speeds in urban areas is through engineering, using approaches such as traffic calming or greater enforcement.
Jim Fitzpatrick: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what estimate he has made of the monetary value of savings attributed to the prevention of road death and injury at monitored speed camera sites in each year since 2007. 
Mike Penning: The Department for Transport has not made any estimate of the value of savings attributed to the prevention of road death and injury at specific speed camera sites. However, the Department's guidance does recommend that speed and collision data are collected by road safety partnerships and the contribution cameras make to casualty reduction monitored and reviewed, at least annually.
The Department has estimated that the camera sites included in the former national safety camera programme have together been saving approximately £400 million per year of casualty and accident costs since 2007. This estimate is based on the findings of the 'National Safety Camera Programme: Four Year Evaluation Report' (PA Consulting and University College London, December 2005), with some assumptions about how casualty savings have reduced since, for example due to reductions in casualty levels for other reasons. It includes savings at both speed and red light camera sites.
The Department's latest estimates of the annual cost to the UK economy of road accidents are published in Reported Road Casualties Great Britain (RRCGB): 2008 Annual Report, on page 28, table 2c. Copies of the report have been deposited in the House Library and are also available at:
Ms Winterton: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the effect on the economy of not proceeding with (a) planned improvements to White Rose Way in Doncaster and (b) the Feningley and Rossington Route Regeneration Scheme to Doncaster. 
Norman Baker: We have not made any decisions about which local authority major schemes will be supported and will not be in a position to do so until after the spending review. Consequently no such assessment has been made.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the merits of increasing the penalties applied to speeding offences. 
Mike Penning: No assessment has been made about the merits of changing the penalty system for speeding. However, the Department keeps all its policies under review and will be considering a number of options to improve road safety. Any change to the penalty system for speeding would be subject to public consultation.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will publish (a) a record of each meeting he has held with other Ministers in his Department and (b) each submission he has received from (i) other Ministers and (ii) officials in his Department on speed limits in urban areas. 
Mr Philip Hammond: I have regular scheduled weekly meetings with my ministerial team as well as ad hoc discussions when required. In line with paragraph 2.1 of the Ministerial Code I am not prepared to publish records of these meetings or internal discussions and submissions.
DFT Ministers have had several meetings and received a number of submissions on speed policy.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Transport which of his Department's capital projects is being reviewed in 2010-11; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Philip Hammond: I refer the hon. Member to my answer of 5 July 2010, Official Report, column 7W.
Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many (a) males and (b) females in each age group have been (i) prosecuted and (ii) convicted of offences related to anti-Semitic violence in (A) Southend, (B) Essex, (C) the Metropolitan Police area of London and (D) England and Wales in the last 12 months. 
This information is not collected centrally. The Court Proceedings Database holds information on defendants proceeded against, found guilty and sentenced for criminal offences in England and Wales. These data include information on the age of the defendant, their gender, the police force area and
court where proceedings took place as well as the specific offence and statute for the offence. Other than where specified in the statute, information held centrally does not include the details of the victim.
Stella Creasy: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what information her Department holds on the number of claimants for asylum advised by Refugee and Migrant Justice before it went into administration; and what assessment her Department has made of the effects of that administration on the (a) time taken to complete claims and (b) costs to the public purse of processing the claims of those persons . 
Damian Green: In each case where the UK Border Agency is notified by an individual applicant's legal representative of their details, these are recorded on our caseworking database. UK Border Agency internal management information shows that, at the beginning of July, Refugee and Migrant Justice (RMJ) were on the database representing more than 10,000 asylum applicants, of which fewer than half are recorded as being active cases. We are waiting to be advised of RMJ's final estimates of numbers of clients by the Legal Services Commission as RMJ's administrators manage the transfer of cases to other representatives.
The UK Border Agency, with the Legal Services Commission, is working to ensure prompt access to alternative legal representation for all applicants as well as to ensure that the impact of what has happened to RMJ, in terms of both cost and effect on individual cases, is minimised.
Mr MacShane: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what funds have been provided to Maxim Bakiyev following his application for asylum in the UK. 
Damian Green: It is not Home Office policy to comment on individual cases.
Mr Woolas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the reasons are for the time taken to publish COMPASS programme contract notices relating to the commissioning of services for asylum seekers. 
Damian Green: The original timetable for the COMPASS programme was to publish the invitation to tender for new asylum accommodation services in the summer of 2010.
Given the recent change of Government and the size of the contracts involved it has been agreed to delay the issue of the formal tender document until new ministers have had the opportunity to review the current plans and the strategy, to ensure best value.
Mr Woolas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department when her Department plans to publish its response to the consultation on unaccompanied asylum-seeking children. 
Damian Green: The Government last issued a consultation paper regarding unaccompanied asylum seeking children in February 2007: 'Planning Better Outcomes and Support for Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children'. A formal response was published in January 2008 entitled 'Better Outcomes: The Way Forward-Improving the Care of Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children'.
Although not pursuing a formal consultation, the UK Border Agency is in regular and frequent discussion with its partners on improvements to policy and process around dealing with unaccompanied asylum-seeking children. For example, a number of children's charities and refugee groups have recently been asked to review proposed amendments to the Processing an Asylum Application from a Child instruction to reflect changes in policy to remove some unaccompanied children to their country of origin where adequate reception arrangements are in place. In circumstances like this, comments and recommendations from partners will be factored into the revised instruction rather than being the subject of a formal response to consultation.
Mr Woolas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what alternatives to the detention of families whose asylum applications have been rejected her Department is considering. 
Damian Green: I recently announced a review into the detention of children for asylum purposes so it can be brought to an end. The terms of reference of the review included a requirement to consider how the detention of children for immigration purposes will be ended and how a new family removals model can be established which protects the welfare of children and ensures the return of those who have no right to be in the UK. This will involve options based on keeping families with children in the community and these are now being considered in draft form by the Departments concerned and by me.
Mr Woolas: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans her Department has to assess the market for new providers of asylum accommodation services for the purposes of achieving greater flexibility and value for money. 
Damian Green: The current contracts which provide asylum accommodation services are due to expire during 2011. A programme to address the replacement of these services was initiated in July 2009. The programme has carried out a full and detailed analysis of the accommodation market, which has included 40 face to face meetings with prospective suppliers. This will help identify the potential for creating commercial solutions that will allow UKBA to achieve greater flexibility and value for money.
John Mann: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department how many Tamils have been granted (a) asylum and (b) indefinite leave to remain in the last five years. 
Damian Green: UKBA does not hold information by ethnicity. The information requested could be obtained only at disproportionate cost by examination of individual case records.
Mary Creagh: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department which types of offence were taken into consideration in the decision to refuse UK citizenship to persons on the grounds of involvement in war crimes in (a) 2008 and (b) 2009. 
Damian Green: I refer the hon. Member to my reply of 22 June 2010, Official Report, column 144W.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|