|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
The income from disposals is normally credited to the Delegated Expenditure Limit (DEL) of the Department and reduces the requirement for funding by the Treasury. For two Coal Authority disposals totalling £218,300, the income from disposals originally funded from grant in aid was paid to the Treasury.
The office space per employee (based on net internal area) for Whitehall place, London and Atholl house 86-88 Guild street, Aberdeen, AB11 6AR was 10.0 square metres at 1 June 2009 and 8.5 square metres at 1 June 2010.
Alun Cairns: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what the (a) average and (b) highest daily rate paid to consultants by his Department has been in each year since its inception. 
Matthew Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how many chairs his Department has purchased since its creation; how much it spent in each such year; and what the five most expensive chairs purchased in each such year were. 
In financial year 2009-10 1,093 chairs were purchased by DECC.
The total cost for the above chairs was £262,000 excluding VAT.
The five most expensive chairs purchased were special chairs for staff required under health and safety advice. The cost of these were as follows: £953.04, £913.73, £909.27, £887.23, £857.22 excluding VAT.
From April 2010 to date 25 chairs were purchased by DECC.
The total cost to date is £8,500 excluding VAT.
The five most expensive chairs purchased to date were special chairs for staff required under health and safety advice. The cost of these were as follows: £874.96, £848.52, £810.40, £802.25, £744.65 excluding VAT.
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change which IT contracts awarded by his Department since its inception have been abandoned; and what the monetary value of each such contract was. 
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what the expenditure on vehicles of (a) his Department and (b) each (i) non-departmental public body and (ii) executive agency for which he is responsible in (A) Scotland, (B) Wales, (C) each region of England and (D) Northern Ireland was in the last three financial years; and what the planned expenditure is in each case for 2010-11. 
Gregory Barker: The Department of Energy and Climate Change has not incurred any expenditure on vehicles since it was established on 3 October 2008 and does not plan to in 2010-11. The Department is responsible for four non-departmental public bodies which have incurred expenditure as follows:
1. The Committee on Climate Change has spent nothing on vehicles since its inception on 26 November 2008 and has no plans to spend anything in 2010-11.
2. The Coal Authority spent £190,592 in 2007/08, £186,019 in 2008/09, £193,639 in 2009-10 and the planned expenditure for 2010-11 is £234,220. The breakdown by regions can be provided only at disproportionate-cost.
3. The expenditure incurred and planned by the Civil Nuclear Police Authority (CNPA) and the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority (NDA) by regions is shown in the following table:
|2007-08||2008-09||2009-10||2010-11 (p lanned )|
Pete Wishart: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what average hourly rate his Department has paid to each employment agency for agency staff in each year since its inception. 
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what the cost was of pension contributions incurred by (a) his Department and (b) each (i) non-departmental public body and (ii) executive agency for which he is responsible in (A) Scotland, (B) Wales, (C) each region of England and
(D) Northern Ireland in each of the last three financial years; and what the planned expenditure is for 2010-11. 
Gregory Barker: Since its establishment on 3 October 2008, the Department of Energy and Climate Change has incurred pension contributions of £7,559,000 in 2008-09 and £8,639,000 in 2009-10. The projected cost for 2010-11 is £9,606,000.
The pension contributions incurred in the last three years by non-departmental public bodies for which the Department is responsible are shown in the following table. The breakdown of costs by region and devolved Administration is not available and can be obtained only at disproportionate cost.
Mr Weir: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how much was paid by his Department in rent for properties in (a) total and (b) each (i) region and (ii) nation of the UK in each of the last five years. 
David Mowat: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change if he will take steps to reduce electricity prices for (a) domestic and (b) industrial consumers by 35 per cent.; and if he will make a statement. 
Gregory Barker: Artificially reducing retail prices to levels below the competitive levels would be unsustainable, discourage investment in the low carbon infrastructure we require and put at risk our climate change objectives. What matters is that prices are set in a competitive market as a result of rivalry among a range of suppliers.
Ofgem produce a quarterly update on the link between wholesale and retail energy prices precisely in order to increase levels of pricing transparency. The latest report showed the major suppliers have cut their prices in response to falling wholesale prices and that margins were lower than in the previous quarter. Ofgem has said that if suppliers stopped competing on price or domestic prices did not respond to a sustained fall in wholesale prices, it would look closely at the market.
Mr Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change if he will take steps to ensure that (a) energy monitors displaying real time data on consumption are provided with each smart meter installation, (b) smart meter customers are provided with information on using smart meters to reduce their (i) energy bills and (ii) carbon dioxide emissions and (c) consumers' energy data will (A) remain under the control of consumers and (B) be protected from misuse. 
Charles Hendry: The Department and Ofgem are currently consulting on a range of smart metering proposals. These include proposals relating to consumer information, including in-home displays, and to data privacy and security. The proposals are contained in the Smart Metering Implementation Programme Prospectus and a number of supporting documents, published on 27 July 2010, and available at
Mr Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change if he will bring forward proposals in the Energy and Green Economy Bill to ensure the provision of information on the costs transferred by energy suppliers to consumers. 
Charles Hendry: The Government are committed to improving the transparency of energy bills and improving information to consumers to help them understand and control their energy costs and are currently considering the extent of the information that should be included. Ofgem have produced readily available factsheets explaining energy bills which give a breakdown of the costs that make up consumer bills. Some suppliers have chosen to include example cost breakdowns on bills to improve transparency and we would encourage this.
In addition, we have recently published an analysis of the estimated impacts of energy and climate change policies on energy prices and bills, which provides further information on the costs of these policies. A copy of this is available online at:
The most recently available sub-regional split of fuel poverty relates to 2006, and shows that there were around 2,200 fuel poor households in the Wimbledon
constituency. In 2003 there were around 2,100 fuel poor households in the Wimbledon constituency. The methodology used for the 2006 work differs from that previously used, so care should be taken in comparing the fuel poverty levels in one area between 2003 and 2006.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change pursuant to the answer of 5 July 2010, Official Report, column 38W, on the Redfern Inquiry, when he expects to publish the Inquiry's report on human tissue analysis in UK nuclear facilities; and what the reason is for the time taken to publish the report. 
Charles Hendry: It was originally the intention of DECC to publish the Redfern Inquiry report on human tissue analysis in UK nuclear facilities before the summer recess. However as we wish to publish the report as a parliamentary paper, the date of publication was dependent on the parliamentary timetable. The parliamentary timetable came under great pressure and it was therefore not possible to find a suitable time before recess. I now expect to publish the report after the House returns in the autumn.
Caroline Flint: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how many former mineworkers in (a) Don Valley constituency, (b) Doncaster and (c) South Yorkshire have received coal health compensation scheme payments; and what the total sums paid were in each case. 
Charles Hendry: The number of former miners in Don Valley, Doncaster and South Yorkshire who have received payments under the Coal Health Compensation schemes for Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and Vibration White Finger (VWF), together with compensation claims for other conditions and the amount paid in each of those areas is shown in the following table as at 25 July 2010.
|Total claims and damages paid, less compensation recovery unit (CRU) to miners in the Don Valley, Doncaster and South Yorkshire constituencies|
|Number of claims||Damages paid (£)|
1. Don Valley: (Don Valley)
2. Doncaster: (Barnsley East and Mexborough, Don Valley, Doncaster Central, Doncaster North).
3. South Yorkshire: (Don Valley, Doncaster Central, Doncaster North, Barnsley East and Mexborough, Wentworth, Rotherham, Rother Valley, Sheffield Hillsborough, Sheffield Heeley, Sheffield Hallam, Sheffield Brightside, Sheffield Attercliffe, Sheffield Central).
4. The figures show a small reduction to the data reported for VWF total damages in November 2009 (11 November 2009, Official Report, column 517W). This was due to taking into account CRU payments where an issue was identified in a recent reconciliation exercise. Other movements are associated with data cleansing of claim numbers and/or changes of claimant addresses.
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change with which countries the UK has a nuclear co-operation agreement; what assistance the UK has provided to each such country under the terms of the agreement in each of the last five years; and at what cost to the public purse in each such case. 
Charles Hendry: The UK currently has in force seven Nuclear Cooperation Agreements (NCAs) on the general application of the peaceful uses of nuclear energy; these are with the USA, Russia, Japan, Jordan, China, South Korea and Romania. In addition, an NCA with the United Arab Emirates is expected to be signed in the autumn. NCAs are bilateral treaties designed to enable collaborative working between companies and agencies in both states covering civil nuclear trade and information exchange. Detailed records of any assistance provided are not kept centrally except where export licences are involved. The only cost to the public purse would be that spent on negotiating NCAs and as such would be considered part of normal civil service operating expenditure.
Mr Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what plans he has for future levels of public funding for renewable energy; if he will take steps to establish more co-ordinated and long-term funding for renewable technology; and if he will make a statement. 
Gregory Barker: We are committed to securing a significant increase in investment in renewables both to meet the legally binding renewable energy target in 2020, and to meet our longer term decarbonisation objectives. The Government are currently conducting a detailed appraisal of the way the electricity market should be designed, to provide the necessary consistent, long term signals for investment. The coalition agreement makes clear our commitment to establish a full system of feed-in tariffs in electricity-as well as the maintenance of banded renewables obligation certificates (ROCs). We are also fully committed to taking action on renewable heat. We are considering responses to the renewable heat incentive (RHI) consultation and will set out detailed proposals on how we propose to take forward action on renewable heat through the spending review.
The Low Carbon Innovation Group was established with the key aims of setting the strategic direction and coordinating funding for UK low carbon innovation, including renewables. I am co-chairing this group and membership will include the chief executives of the Carbon Trust, Technology Strategy Board, Energy Technologies Institute, research councils and departmental officials responsible for BIS and DECC low carbon innovation spend.
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change whether his Department
plans that renewable obligation certificates rates agreed when energy producers begin a new project should continue at a fixed rate for the life of the project. 
co-fire regular biomass;
use energy crops; or
receive additional support for the use of CHP,
Charles Hendry: As announced in the Annual Energy Statement on 27 July the Electricity Market Reform Project will issue a consultation document in the autumn. There, we will set out the Government's views on how to ensure low carbon, secure and affordable electricity over the coming decades. Any reform to the renewables obligation to include other sources of low carbon energy would be considered within that consultation document.
Mr Umunna: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what funding his Department has provided to (a) Transition Towns and (b) other voluntary groups designed to increase sustainability through local activities in the last 12 months. 
Gregory Barker: DECC has provided funding to Transition Towns and other community organisations over the last 12 months through the Low Carbon Communities Challenge (LCCC) and the Low Carbon Buildings Programme (LCBP).
The LCCC is a two-year DECC-funded research programme providing financial and practical support for 22 "test-bed" communities in England, Wales and Northern Ireland to test delivery options for achieving ambitious cuts in carbon emissions at community level. The first selected projects were appointed in December 2009.
Of the 11 communities that have been provided with funding so far, seven are community based civil society organisations. One of these is Transition Town Totnes, which has been provided with £625,000 to support their project. The other six civil society-led organisations have been provided with a total of £2,593,000 in funding for their projects.
The Low Carbon Buildings Programme-now closed to new applications-provides grants for installing microgeneration technologies and has provided funding for approximately 5,000 community-based projects over the last five years. In the financial year 2009-10, DECC provided £20.58 million in funding through the LCBP to projects such as housing associations, schools, churches, and other not-for-profit organisations, and the forecast expenditure for the financial year 2010-11 is £53.41 million.
|(1 )Department created October 2008.|
(2) To end July 2010.
David Morris: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what his policy is on enabling small businesses to work as contractors on projects funded under the Warm Front scheme. 
Gregory Barker: Installers are appointed to work on the Warm Front Scheme by Eaga, the scheme manager. An open, competitive tendering exercise was carried out in 2009 to appoint installers to the scheme to work across England. From time to time Eaga may select additional installers to work on the scheme, if supply is insufficient to meet demand.
Gregory Barker: Warm Front continues to deliver heating and insulation work across England. We have taken the precautionary measure of making changes to the regulations governing the scheme to allow the scheme to temporarily stop taking new applications to prevent this year's budget being over committed.
Caroline Flint: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what recent assessment his Department has made of the contribution of the Warm Front scheme to (a) improving household energy efficiency and (b) reducing fuel poverty. 
Gregory Barker: The Warm Front Scheme tackles fuel poverty, enabling households to keep their homes warm at an affordable cost. Warm Front has assisted over 2.2 million households since the scheme's inception in 2000. On average, each household which received assistance from the scheme has the potential to save over £350 per annum during the lifetime of measures installed.
Household energy efficiency is measured using the Standard Assessment Procedure (SAP) which rates on a scale of 1 to 100-the higher the number the better the rating. Households assisted by Warm Front in 2009-10 increased their SAP rating on average from 33 to 66.
Caroline Flint: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how many households in Don Valley constituency have received an insulation measure through the Warm Front scheme since its inception. 
(1) This figure is correct up to 17 August 2010.
Chris Heaton-Harris: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what research his Department has (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated on the efficiency and effectiveness of on-shore wind turbines in the last 10 years; how much electricity was generated by wind turbines in the last 12 months; and what the average cost per unit of electricity generated by each generating technology was in 2009. 
Charles Hendry: The Department for Energy and Climate Change, and two of its predecessor departments (the Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and the Department of Trade and Industry) commissioned the following pieces of research containing information on the generation costs and efficiencies of electricity generation technologies, including onshore wind:
The following tables are taken from Mott Macdonald (2010) and give levelised cost estimates (average generation cost per megawatt-hour) for new build plants in the main large-scale electricity generation technologies in the UK, at current engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contract prices.
It should be noted that for the purposes of presentation, the table only gives either 'FOAK' (first-of-a-kind) prices or 'NOAK' (nth-of-a-kind) prices for each technology. On offshore wind, for example, it shows offshore wind 'FOAK' prices, whereas the round 2 technology may be considered to have progressed towards 'NOAK' prices. Mott Macdonald estimate 'NOAK' offshore wind costs at £125/MWh (10% discount rate, 2009 project start at today's EPC prices).
|Case 1: 10% discount rate, 2009 project start at today's EPC prices, with mixed FOAK/NOAK|
|Levelised cost||Gas CC GT||Gas CCGT with CCS FOAK||ASC coal||ASC c oal with CCS FOAK||Coal IGCC FOAK||Coal IGCC with CCS FOAK||Onshore wind||Offshore wind FOAK||Offshore wind R3 FOAK||Nuclear PWR. FOAK|
|Case 1: 10% discount rate, 2009 project start at today's EPC prices, with mixed FOAK/NOAK|
|Levelised Cost||Small business power only. FOAK||Large biomass power only. FOAK||OCGT||AD on wasted||Landfill gas||Sewage gas||Small biomass CHP. FOAK|
|Levelised Cost||Large biomass CHP. FOAK||10MW gas. CHP||Small GT based CHP||CCGT. CHP||Energy from waste||Hydro reservoir|
Dr Fox: The UK Government do not collate or publish figures for civilian casualties in Afghanistan because of the immense difficulty and risks of collecting robust data. Every effort is made to avoid civilian casualties and any that are the result of action by UK armed forces are always a matter of profound regret.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how many (a) Reaper, (b) Predator and (c) Phoenix unmanned aerial vehicles were deployed by the armed forces in Afghanistan in (i) 2009 and (ii) 2010; 
(2) what estimate he has made on the number of (a) Reaper, (b) Predator, (c) Watchkeeper and (d) Phoenix unmanned aerial vehicles to be deployed by the armed forces in Afghanistan in (i) 2011, (ii) 2012, (iii) 2013, (iv) 2014 and (v) 2015. 
We do not comment on the number of RPAS deployed or likely to deploy in Afghanistan. I am withholding the information as its disclosure would, or would be likely to, prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of the armed forces.
Thomas Docherty: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many (a) Ministry of Defence personnel and (b) civilian staff were directly employed at (i) RAF Leuchars, (ii) RAF Kinloss and (iii) RAF Lossiemouth on the latest date for which figures are available. 
|Data as of April 2010|
|(1) Numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10. Numbers ending in five have been rounded to the nearest multiple of 20 to prevent systematic bias. Due to ongoing validation of data from the Personnel Administration System, the armed forces figures are provisional.|
(2) The civilian figures include the Ministry of Defence (MOD) industrial and non-industrial staff, but do not include any staff not directly employed by the MOD, such as contractors.
(3) The armed forces personnel figures include regulars and full-time reservists stationed at the bases, but may differ from the actual number of people working at that location at that time due to deployments etc.
Mr Fabian Hamilton: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many people have been stopped and searched outside RAF (a) Menwith Hill, (b) Fylingdales, (c) Mildenhall, (d) Lakenheath, (e) Feltwell, (f) Fairford, (g) Molesworth, (h) Alconbury and (i) Croughton in each year sine 2000. 
Mr Robathan: The number of people stopped and searched by the Ministry of Defence police (MDP) outside RAF Menwith Hill, Fylingdales, Mildenhall, Lakenheath, Feltwell, Fairford, Molesworth, Alconbury and Croughton in each year since 2004 are shown in the table as follows:
|(1 )None recorded|
There are no recorded searches carried out prior to 2004. The records relate only to MDP incidents. Searches carried out outside the bases are primarily the responsibility of the local Home Office police forces, and they would retain their own records accordingly.
Penny Mordaunt: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assessment his Department has undertaken of the procurement processes for the (a) Type 45 destroyers and (b) Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers; what steps he plans to take in the light of that assessment to improve the procurement process for the Type 26 combat ship; and if he will make a statement. 
Peter Luff: In 2006, a review of the Type 45 programme led to the renegotiated six ship contract, which was signed in 2007. During the same year, the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carrier project underwent independent assurance, which concluded that the project was progressing well and at a more mature stage of development than previous major naval projects prior to manufacture. Linked with this work was an independent financial review, which concluded the costs were robust. However, as reported in the National Audit Office's Major Projects Report 2009, the decisions taken in 2008 to delay the Queen Elizabeth class directly increased costs by an estimated £674 million.
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much funding his Department has allocated to the electromagnetic catapult system project; and for which Royal Air Force aircraft it would be suitable. 
An electro-magnetic aircraft launch system would be capable of launching Carrier Variant type aircraft, although neither the Royal Navy nor the Royal Air Force operate this type of aircraft at present.
Mr Mike Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for what reason the Animal Welfare Advisory Committee (a) was established and (b) is to be dissolved; and whether there are any plans to replace the Advisory Committee. 
Jonathan Reynolds: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he plans to review the arrangements his Department put in place to mark Armed Forces Day in 2010; what representations he has received on the events which took place; what plans he has to recognise the contribution of veterans in future years; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Robathan: Armed Forces Day this year was a great success and we are continually looking for enhanced levels of participation and recognition for future days. Ex-service personnel are at the very heart of all celebrations with many taking the opportunity to stand alongside their serving counterparts.
The National Event in 2011 will be in Edinburgh and plans are currently being formulated that will once again give the whole country the opportunity to honour Britain's armed forces past, present and future.
Mrs Grant: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which organisations his Department has funded to provide welfare and support for the families of service personnel serving in the (a) Army, (b) Navy and (c) Royal Air Force in each of the last 10 years. 
Mr Gerald Howarth: Each armed forces' establishment has dedicated unit welfare staff who, as serving personnel, are ideally placed to provide access to specialist welfare support on a number of topics including financial management, housing, and schooling of dependants. The Army Welfare Service, Naval Personal and Family Service and Royal Marines Welfare, and RAF Community Support provide more focused support and ensure families are put in touch with, and supported by, the most appropriate agency. Moreover, formal arrangements exist with organisations such as the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association (SSAFA) or HIVE Information Centres who complement the unit welfare staff when dealing with specific issues.
In addition, arrangements may be made at a local level with other welfare organisations, for example Relate, to respond to specific unit needs. As the information is not held centrally to identify all organisations which have received funding in each of the last 10 years, it could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Mrs Grant: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what recent progress has been made by his Department on increasing the level of support services available to the parents of serving military personnel; 
Mr Gerald Howarth:
Support to a family, irrespective of the age of the service person, is not necessarily limited to the next of kin as we will do everything we can to inform, help and advise a family not only prior to, but also during, a deployment. This normally includes a briefing by the Unit Commander on the deployment, as well as giving details of websites that allow family members to keep in touch. Single service welfare
organisations are signposted and contact details provided for the Joint Casualty and Compassionate Centre.
Should tragedy occur, it is only right that we focus our immediate attention on the recorded next of kin. Support begins by early notification and then the allocation of a visiting officer who can help with, for example, funeral arrangements, money management such as compensation payments, and accessing welfare organisations that can provide bereavement counselling. The support provided is specific to need and remains in place for as long as it is required.
Mrs Grant: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will take steps to increase the level of counselling and advice services provided to mothers of service personnel under the age of 21 years. 
Mr Gerald Howarth: Support to families is kept under continual review and where there is a specific need we will do all we can to meet it. Our duty of care extends to all our armed forces and we do not differentiate by age when determining what support is available.
Mrs Grant: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much funding his Department allocated to each organisation for the purpose of providing support services to the families of service personnel in each service in each of the last 10 years. 
Mr Gerald Howarth: The information is not held centrally. Support to families is provided from a number of sources, some of which are arranged at a local level and funded accordingly. To determine the level of funding provided in each of the last 10 years would require the search of records retained at a significant number of military establishments. Therefore this information could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Dr Murrison: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the (a) establishment and (b) bearing of hospital specialists was for each (i) regular and (ii) reserve service in each year since 2001; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Robathan: While shortfalls exist in some specialties, the Defence Medical Services have met all the operational requirements placed on them. Medical support to deployed operations is absolutely vital and there is no question of British forces deploying on military operations without the appropriate medical support.
Where a particular specialty is in short supply within the Defence Medical Services to support deployed operations, a flexible manning approach is used drawing upon regular personnel, reserves and allied forces and on occasions a limited number of civilian contractors are deployed to support operations and to backfill positions in the United Kingdom to allow uniformed personnel to deploy.
Data for reservists are not readily available prior to September 2008 and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. Information for each year since 2008 has been placed in the Library of the House.
David Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what proportion of accommodation for Royal Navy personnel was in each condition category on the latest date for which figures are available; 
Mr Robathan: A breakdown of the number of service family accommodation (SFA) properties and single living accommodation (SLA) bed-spaces by both condition category and service is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
However, for the total number of SFA properties at each standard for condition, I refer the hon. Members to the answer I gave on 26 July 2010, Official Report, column 617W to my hon. Friend the Member for Castle Point (Rebecca Harris).
Mr Robathan: "Refurbishment" is not a term used by the Ministry of Defence in regard to property. However, so far as the upgrading of service family accommodation and single-living accommodation is concerned, I refer the hon. Members to the answers I gave on 15 June 2010, Official Report, columns 344-45W, to the hon. Member for Glasgow North East (Mr Bain) and 15 June 2010, Official Report, column 345W, to the hon. Member for Ellesmere Port and Neston (Andrew Miller).
Mr Gerald Howarth: The Ministry of Defence currently holds 230 private finance initiative properties, across three estates, to meet the entitlement of service personnel based at Abbey Wood. Housing is allocated mainly by rank for officers and by family size for other ranks, and cannot be broken down in the form requested.
There are a further 23 other ranks and nine officers' service family accommodation (SFA) properties across the Bristol area. These properties are leased from Annington Homes Ltd. at a total rental cost of £120,800 per year.
When demand outweighs supply and no suitable SFA can be found, as a last resort substitute service family accommodation (SSFA) may be offered to service personnel within the appropriate distance from their duty station. As at July 2010, 13 SSFA were being used to house service families posted to Abbey Wood, at a cost of £14,356 per calendar month. The number and costs of substitute accommodation fluctuates on a daily basis.
Mr Kevan Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) for how long each vacant services property assigned to each service and in each location has been vacant; and what the five most frequently given reasons for such vacancies in each such category are; 
Mr Kevan Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the cost to the public purse of providing armed forces accommodation on (a) the Falkland Islands and (b) Gibraltar was in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Mr Robathan: It is not possible to identify spending on armed forces living accommodation alone for these locations. These costs are paid from a single estate budget covering all Permanent Joint Operating Bases, which also includes office accommodation, utilities infrastructure, and port and airfield maintenance. The budget for the Falkland Islands also covers the UK military facilities on Ascension Island.
British Forces South Atlantic Islands: £14.4 million.
British Forces Gibraltar: £13.7 million (including £2.5 million for utilities).
Gordon Banks: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what expenditure his Department incurred on renting private sector accommodation for armed forces personnel in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Mr Robathan: While the majority of Service Family Accommodation (SFA) properties in Scotland and Northern Ireland are owned by the Ministry of Defence (MOD), other UK properties are leased from the private sector through various arrangements, including private finance initiatives and from Annington Homes Ltd.
As a last resort, where suitable SFA or Single Living Accommodation does not exist in an area or is temporarily unavailable, Substitute SFA (SSFA) and Substitute Single Service Accommodation (SSSA) may be rented from the local rental market.
|Type of accommodation||Number of properties||Cost in FY 2009-10 (£ million)|
Mr David: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many properties are rented from the Crown Estate to provide armed forces accommodation; and at what cost in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Mr Robathan: The Ministry of Defence currently occupies 168 properties from the Crown Estate to house entitled service personnel and their families under a longstanding notional agreement with the Crown Estate, whereby no rental costs are incurred.
|Number of SFA properties||Number of SLA bed-spaces|
Mr David: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many properties are rented from the Duchy of Cornwall to provide armed forces accommodation; and at what cost in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Mr Tom Harris: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what expenditure his Department incurred on void accommodation for each of the armed services in the latest period for which figures are available; and at which locations there is void accommodation. 
Mr Robathan: The total expenditure on void single living and service family accommodation, which includes that on rent, maintenance, modernisation and utilities, is not separately identifiable from that on all other accommodation.
Void accommodation is located at many different sites across the defence estate and is usually only void for short periods to allow for routine moves of service personnel, improvement or modernisation work, demolition, or disposal. The Department will always need to maintain a management margin of void accommodation for these purposes.
Gordon Banks: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many properties are rented from the Duchy of Lancaster to provide armed forces accommodation; and at what cost in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Mr Robathan: It is not possible to identify spending on armed forces living accommodation alone for the Cyprus Sovereign Base Areas. These costs are paid from a single estate budget covering all Permanent Joint Operating Bases, which also includes office accommodation, utilities infrastructure, and port and airfield maintenance.
Mr Robathan: Civilian staff who are transferred to a new permanent place of work outside of reasonable daily travel of their current home, may be eligible for assistance with relocating to the new area. In the period 1 June 2009 to 31 May 2010, there were 233 relocations which involved a move of home.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|