|Previous Section||Index||Home Page|
15 Nov 2010 : Column 587Wcontinued
Mr David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how much his Department had spent on telephone voice analysis to detect fraudulent benefit claims on the latest date for which figures are available. 
Chris Grayling: In 2008-09 a total of £1,734,314.07 was paid directly to the 24 local authorities involved in voice risk analysis pilots. There was no DWP funding for voice risk analysis in subsequent years. The Department has discontinued interest in voice risk analysis.
Mr David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what proportion of his Department budget for 2011-12 will be allocated to voice analysis for benefit fraud detection purposes. 
Chris Grayling: No funding has been allocated to voice analysis for benefit fraud detection purposes in 2011-12. The Department has discontinued interest in voice risk analysis.
Julian Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps his Department takes to ensure prompt resolution of appeals against the outcomes of work capability assessments. 
Chris Grayling: The administration of Jobcentre Plus is a matter for the chief executive of Jobcentre Plus, Darra Singh. I have asked him to provide my hon. Friend with the information requested.
The Secretary of State for Work and for Pensions has asked me to reply to your question regarding the steps his Department takes to ensure appeals against the outcomes of work capability assessments are resolved promptly. This is something which falls within the responsibilities delegated to me as Chief Executive of Jobcentre Plus.
Jobcentre Plus has recently undertaken successful trials in Wrexham to improve the handling of appeals arising from Work Capability Assessment (WCA) decisions. This improved process has now been rolled out nationally and involves Appeals Officers in Jobcentre Plus making contact by telephone with all customers who wish to challenge their WCA decision. This provides an opportunity to explain the reasons for reaching the decision and to explore further the grounds for challenging the decision. It also provides an opportunity to obtain any relevant new information
and to explain to the customer whether, in the light of all the evidence now available, it is appropriate to revise the decision. The success of the Wrexham trial suggests this improvement will have an effect in further reducing the volume of appeals.
Where the discussion with the customer reveals that it is not appropriate to change the original decision, the customer may decide to proceed to appeal. In these cases, customers are advised that the appeal will be sent to the Tribunal Service who are responsible for arranging a date and time for hearing the appeal.
Jobcentre Plus continues to work closely with the Tribunal Service to identify how further efficiencies and quicker processing of Employment Support Allowance (ESA) appeals can be achieved.
I hope this information is helpful.
Mr Laurence Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people have undergone mental health assessments in connection with work capability assessments in (a) England and (b) Gloucestershire in the last year for which figures are available. 
Chris Grayling: Almost all ESA claimants undergo a Work Capability Assessment (the exception being those who are known to be terminally ill), although this does not always involve a face-to-face assessment and is sometimes based on the paper evidence available. All claimants are assessed against the same set of descriptors, laid out in legislation, which cover physical functions and mental, intellectual and cognitive functions.
For the year to the end of June 2010, 353,100 assessments have been carried out in England. In the same period, 4,400 assessments have been completed in Gloucestershire.
Gloucestershire has been taken as the combination of the local authorities of Cheltenham, Cotswold, Forest of Dean, Gloucester, South Gloucestershire, Stroud and Tewkesbury.
Julian Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what role he expects voluntary groups to play in the Work Programme. 
Chris Grayling: The voluntary sector has a wide range of skills and experience that it will be vital to harness if the Work Programme is to be successful. We have been actively encouraging potential sub-contractors, including those from the voluntary sector, to engage with potential prime contractors nationwide.
We are also ensuring that we protect smaller voluntary organisations by requiring prime contractors to meet the award winning Merlin standard, an independent accreditation of the arrangements between a prime contractor and their sub-contractors/partners.
20. Alex Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the likely effects on the future of sport in schools of the reductions in funding for school sport proposed in the comprehensive spending review. 
Tim Loughton: The planned changes in the Department's expenditure on school sport beginning in 2011-12 will enable us to deliver on our coalition Government commitment to create an annual Olympic-style school sport event to encourage more competitive sport in schools.
Damian Hinds: To ask the Secretary of State for Education when he plans to extend the acceptance criteria for schools wishing to convert to academy status; and what new criteria he is considering. 
Mr Gibb: Currently only those schools judged as outstanding by Ofsted can apply to convert to become academies. However, we do want the benefits and freedoms that academy status brings to be available to many more schools. An announcement will be made shortly about when the next group of schools will be invited to apply, and what criteria will be used to determine that group. Ofsted inspection judgments will continue to form an important part of the process.
Paul Maynard: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what future plans he has for the funding of Booktrust; and if he will make a statement. 
Sarah Teather: The Department for Education's overall funding settlement was announced on 20 October. We are working through the details of that settlement and the funding implications for individual policy and programmes, including the funding of Booktrust. We will make further announcements over the coming weeks.
Zac Goldsmith: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what timetable he has set for the James review of capital investment. 
Mr Gibb: The capital review announced by the Secretary of State on 5 July 2010 will conclude its work by the end of this calendar year. We intend to determine capital allocations as soon as possible thereafter.
John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many and what proportion of children in care were adopted in each of the last five years. 
Tim Loughton: The requested information is available as part of the "Statistical First Release, Children Looked After by Local Authorities in England (including adoption and care leavers)-year ending 31 March 2010". This can be found at:
Information on the number and proportion of children looked after who were adopted in each of the last five years is found in table D1. These tables can be found in the excel link titled 'England Summary tables'.
John Hemming: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many children were (a) taken into care (excluding respite care), (b) left care and (c) were adopted in each year from 1980 to 2005; how many left care through adoption in each such year; and how many were in care on 31 March in each such year. 
Tim Loughton: The information requested on (a) the number of children taken into care (excluding respite care) from 1980 to 2005 can be provided only at a disproportionate cost. Information on the number of children who were taken into care was published for the first time in 2010. This table shows information for year ending 31 March 2006 to 2010 and can be found in table C4 (in the excel link titled "England Summary tables") available at:
Information on the number of children (b) who left care, (c) who were adopted and the number who were in care on 31 March can be found via the "Children Looked After" publications, as follows:
"Children Looked After by Local Authorities Year ending 31 March 1998", England available at:
Table A: Number of children who were looked after at 31 March for year ending 31 March 1988 to 1998.
Table H: Number of looked-after children adopted during year ending 31 March 1994 to 1998.
"Children Looked After by Local Authorities Year ending 31 March 2001", England available at:
Table S: Number of children who ceased to be looked after during the year ending 31 March 1997 to 2001 by duration of latest period of care.
Table H: Number of looked-after children adopted during the year ending 31 March 1997 to 2001.
"Children Looked After by Local Authorities, Year Ending 31 March 2005" available at:
Table AB: Children who ceased to be looked after during the year ending 31 March 2001 to 2005 by gender and age on ceasing.
Table AM: Looked-after children adopted during the year ending 31 March by gender, age at adoption, final legal status, duration of final period of care, age on starting final period of care and time between best interest decision and placement for adoption, 2001 to 2005.
Both of these tables can be found in the additional information titled "Volume 1-National Tables".
Number of children looked after at 31 March by local authority, 1997 to 2005. This can be found in the additional information spreadsheet titled "Children looked after at 31 March by local authorities, 1997 to 2005".
Information on the number of children looked after at 31 March is not available prior to 1988. Information on the number of children who ceased to be looked after prior to 1997 and information on the number of looked-after children adopted prior to 1994 can be provided only at a disproportionate cost.
Historical data in the above statistical releases may differ from that included in older publications. This is mainly due to the implementation of amendments and corrections sent by some local authorities after the publication date of previous materials.
Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many child care places are available in children's centres in Warrington North constituency; and how many Government-funded places at such centres will be available at the end of the comprehensive spending review period. 
Sarah Teather [holding answer 27 October 2010]: The Department does not collect data on the number of child care places available in Sure Start Children's Centres at a constituency or a local authority level. Local authorities have a duty under the Childcare Act 2006 to secure sufficient child care, where reasonably practicable, for working parents in their area. As part of the spending review settlement, the Government announced that they will be extending 15 hours per week of free early education to the most disadvantaged two-year-olds, building on the current 15 hour free entitlement for all three and four-year-olds. We expect 130,000 two-year-olds to benefit from this extension by the end of the spending review period.
Dr Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many times since 12 May 2010 Ministers in his Department have met with representatives of the (a) Church of England, (b) Church of England's Education Division, (c) National Society, (d) Catholic Church in England and Wales, (e) Catholic Education Service, (f) Catholic Diocesan Schools Commission, (g) Catholic Association of Teachers Schools and Colleges, (h) Methodist Church, (i) Methodist Education, (j) Muslim Council of Britain, (k) Board of Deputies of British Jews, (l) Agency for Jewish Education, (m) Accord Coalition, (n) British Humanist Association and (o) National Secular Society. 
Mr Gibb [holding answer 25 October 2010]: The following table gives details of the number of occasions Ministers at the Department for Education have held meetings at the Department with representatives of the faith related organisations listed since 12 May 2010.
|Organisation||Total number of meetings|
Church of England, Church of England's Education Division, The National Society
Catholic Church in England and Wales, Catholic Education Service for England and Wales
Ms Angela Eagle: To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) how much funding to meet staff redundancy costs was identified in his Department's settlement letter in respect of the comprehensive spending review; 
(2) what estimate he has made of the cost to his Department of staff redundancy in each of the next four years. 
Tim Loughton: All pressures on Departments' budgets were taken into account as part of the spending review and settlements were allocated accordingly. The full costs of redundancies will be met from within the Department's spending review resource DEL settlement.
Pat Glass: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what recent assessment his Department has made of the likely effects on young people from poor backgrounds of the ending of educational maintenance allowance; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Gibb: The education maintenance allowance (EMA) scheme will close at the end of the 2010/11 academic year. Evaluation evidence from the EMA pilots as well as more recent research suggests that around 90% of recipients would have stayed on after 16 even if they had not received EMA. We are replacing EMA with an enhanced learner support fund, which will enable closer targeting of resources on the most disadvantaged young people. Schools and colleges will be able to target support towards those young people who would not otherwise be able to participate because of serious financial barriers.
Pat Glass: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans he has for student support following the ending of education maintenance allowance; and if he will make a statement. 
Mr Gibb: The education maintenance allowance scheme will close at the end of the 2010/11 academic year and no new applications will be processed from 1 January 2011. It will be replaced by an enhanced Discretionary Learner Support Fund. Decisions about which young people should receive financial support from the Discretionary Learner Support Fund will be made by schools, colleges and training providers, who are in a better position than Government to determine the needs of individual students. They will target support to those young people who most need it to continue in learning.
Mr Lammy: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many students in (a) Tottenham constituency and (b) Haringey received education maintenance allowance in each year since 2004-05; and how much was paid in that allowance to pupils in each such area in each such year. 
This is a matter for the Young People's Learning Agency (YPLA) who operate the education maintenance allowance for the Department for Education.
Peter Lauener the YPLA's chief executive, will write to the right hon. Member for Tottenham with the information requested and a copy of his reply will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
Rushanara Ali: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many young people resident in (a) Bethnal Green and Bow constituency, (b) Tower Hamlets and (c) London have received the education maintenance allowance in each year since its inception. 
Mr Gibb: This is a matter for the Young People's Learning Agency (YPLA) who operate the education maintenance allowance for the Department for Education. Peter Lauener, the YPLA's chief executive, will write to the hon. Member for Bethnal Green and Bow with the information requested and a copy of his reply will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
Helen Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what expenditure his Department incurred on education maintenance allowance in (a) 2008-09 and (b) 2009-10; and what forecast he has made of such expenditure in (i) 2010-11 and (ii) each of the subsequent four years. 
Mr Gibb [holding answer 25 October 2010]: The total expenditure on EMA in 2008-09 was £532 million and in 2009-10 it was £569 million. The budget for 2010-11 is £564 million. We estimate that around £174 million will be spent on EMA in the 2011-12 financial year (as a proportion of payments to young people participating in the academic year 2010/11 fall in the financial year 2011-12). The EMA scheme will cease at the end of the 2010/11 academic year.
Christopher Pincher: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how much his Department spent on education maintenance allowance payments in (a) Tamworth and (b) Staffordshire in (i) 2008-09 and (ii) 2009-10. 
Mr Gibb: This is a matter for the Young People's Learning Agency (YPLA) who operate the education maintenance allowance for the Department for Education. Peter Lauener the YPLA's chief executive, will write to my hon. Friend the Member for Tamworth with the information requested and a copy of his reply will be placed in the Libraries of both Houses.
Andy Burnham: To ask the Secretary of State for Education with reference to the HM Treasury press notice on 2010-11 savings of 24 May 2010, what definition of frontline funding his Department uses; and how much he plans to allocate to frontline funding for schools in 2011-12. 
[holding answer 19 October 2010]: The core school baselines we are protecting are: funds allocated for one to one tuition; funds allocated for "every child" programmes such as Every Child a Reader;
extended schools; school lunch grant; School Standards Grant; School Development Grant; Specialist schools grant; Ethnic Minority Achievement grant; The National Strategies' budgets that were allocated to schools; Dedicated Schools Grant, and funds allocated for Academies.
The total planned schools budget for 2011-12 is £36.1 billion.
Julian Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what guidance his Department issues to local education authorities on reduction of their schools budgets. 
Mr Gibb: Following the spending review, funding for the schools budget will increase in cash terms by £3.6 billion by 2014-15. This is a 0.1% increase in real terms in each year. The management of the schools budget by local authorities is governed by the School Finance (England) Regulations: guidance is issued along with the regulations. The Department is currently consulting on new regulations to come into force in April 2011.
Mr Stewart Jackson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether he plans to review the (a) work programme and (b) budget of the Family and Parenting Institute; and if he will make a statement. 
Sarah Teather [holding answer 2 November 2010]: Family and Parenting Institute have a long-standing financial relationship with the Department and their work programme is regularly reviewed. We have announced the overall funding settlement for the Department for Education, but we are still in the process of determining what this means for specific activities including future funding for activities undertaken by the Family and Parenting Institute. We will make further announcements about funding for specific programmes and organisations over the coming weeks.
Gregg McClymont: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how much funding his Department plans to provide to the Family Rights Advice Service in each year of the 2010 spending review period. 
Sarah Teather [holding answer 12 November 2010]: We have announced the overall funding settlement for the Department for Education, but we are still in the process of determining what this means for specific activities, including future funding for any family rights advice service in England. We will make further announcements about funding for specific programmes over the coming weeks.
Sheila Gilmore: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what qualifications teachers employed by free schools will be required to have. 
Innovation, diversity and flexibility are at the heart of the free schools policy. We want the dynamism that characterises the best independent schools to drive up standards in the state sector. In this spirit we
will not be setting overly prescriptive requirements in relation to qualifications; instead we will expect business cases to demonstrate how governing bodies intend to guarantee the highest quality of teaching and leadership in their schools. No school will be allowed to proceed unless its proposals for quality teaching are soundly based. Ensuring each free school's unique educational vision is translated into the classroom will require brilliant people with a diverse range of experience.
Robert Halfon: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how much his Department has spent on services provided by the Institute for Fiscal Studies in the last 24 months. 
Tim Loughton: Department for Education financial records show that between October 2008 and October 2010 the Department spent £736,000 on services provided by the Institute for Fiscal Studies.
Nic Dakin: To ask the Secretary of State for Education when he plans to announce his decision on the future of support for Playbuilder schemes; and if he will take steps to ensure that support for local community groups operating such schemes is maintained at no less than present levels. 
Sarah Teather: Decisions have now been taken on savings to the 2010-11 play capital budget. A total of £20.8 million has been saved from this years play budget, reducing the original figure from £75 million to £54.2 million.
Revised allocations for this year have been communicated to local authorities. All local authorities will receive almost two-thirds of their original allocation. We have also provided additional funding to 49 local authorities who have contractual commitments that would otherwise exceed their revised allocation.
One of the big successes of the play programme has been the involvement of community groups in helping to improve the availability and quality of local play areas, and we want this level of community engagement to continue. We also recognise the huge efforts of local authorities, partner agencies, the play sector and industry in improving facilities for children across the country.
For the future, the Government want to give local people more control over what local money is spent on, and what gets built where, to make the most of the limited resources available. Play England will be providing specific advice and help to communities and local authorities in the current financial year.
Angela Smith: To ask the Secretary of State for Education when he expects to take final decisions on the funding of Playbuilder projects. 
Sarah Teather: Decisions have now been taken on savings to the 2010-11 play capital budget. A total of £20.8 million has been saved from this years play budget, reducing the original figure from £75 million to £54.2 million.
The Department wrote to local authorities in July asking them to give us information on the status of their 2010-11 play projects. We said the Department would cover the cost of play areas which local authorities had already completed this year or where groundwork had already started and, subject to affordability, ensure that local authorities did not need to break any contractual commitments they had already entered into.
I am pleased to be able to report that we have been able to achieve this aim. All local authorities will receive almost two-thirds of their original allocations and we have also provided additional funding to 49 authorities who have contractual commitments that would otherwise exceed their revised allocation.
The Secretary of State has written to local authorities informing them of the completion of the savings exercise, notifying them of their revised play capital funding allocations for this financial year and reminding them that the ring-fence has been removed from this grant in order to provide local authorities with more flexibility to manage their own local budgets.
It is now for local authorities and their partners to make decisions on which local projects progress. There will be no centrally made judgement on which individual projects progress.
Ann Coffey: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many three-year-olds attended pre-school education in the (a) maintained, (b) private and (c) voluntary sector as a proportion of the total number of eligible children in each super output area in the North West in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Sarah Teather [holding answer 25 October 2010]: The total number of three-year-olds attending pre-school education in the north-west region is given in the table. Numbers for each super output area in the north-west region have been placed in the Libraries.
|Number of three-year-old children( 1, 2 ) attending pre-school education maintained( 3) , private( 4) , voluntary and independent providers, north-west region, January 2010|
|Type of provider||Number( 5)|
|(1) Children aged three as at 31 December 2009. (2) Number of three-year-olds may include some children aged two. (3) Includes maintained nursery, primary, and special schools. (4) Includes childminder networks, local authority day nurseries, private providers and other providers. (5 )Numbers rounded to nearest 10. Source: Early Years Census 2010 and School Census 2010.|
Figures are usually reported for private, voluntary, and independent providers as well as maintained schools. Therefore figures for independent schools have been included in the answer for completeness.
The number of three-year-olds attending pre-school education as a proportion of the eligible children is not available. Since all children are entitled to Early Years provision, the proportion would be based on the total
three-year-old population in each area. However, ONS population estimates are not available on a comparable basis to the data used in the answer and population estimates are not accurate at the low level of super output area.
The latest figures on early education places for three and four-year-olds in England were published in Statistical First Release (SFR) 16/2010 "Provision for children under five years of age in England: January 2010", available on the Department's website:
Stella Creasy: To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) whether local education authorities will have discretion in passing on the pupil premium to schools; 
(2) what the monetary value of the pupil premium will be per qualifying pupil in each year to 2014-15; and what account he plans to take of geographic location in determining the level of that premium; 
(3) how much he plans to spend on the pupil premium in each year to 2014-15; 
(4) whether local education authorities will continue to receive funding for education welfare services and services for pupils with special educational needs following the introduction of the pupil premium; 
(5) when he plans to announce the criteria to be used to determine the pupils to qualify for the pupil premium. 
Mr Gibb [holding answer 4 November 2010]: The Government held a public consultation from 26 July to 18 October on school funding for 2011-12 and the introduction of the pupil premium, covering the methodology for allocation of the premium.
We set out in the consultation document that the conditions of grant for the pupil premium will require local authorities to pass it on in its entirety to maintained mainstream schools using specific defined per pupil amounts, for every relevant pupil in years from reception to year 11.
We are currently considering responses to the consultation and will make a statement on the outcome shortly.
The pupil premium will rise progressively to £2.5 billion over the spending review period. We will announce the pupil premium allocations for 2011-12 before the end of the year.
There is no specific earmarked funding for education welfare services. Councils fund these services from a combination of formula grant and council tax. It is for councils to decide how much they wish to spend on these services. Services for pupils with special educational needs will continue to be funded through the dedicated schools grant in 2011-12.
We will announce further information about the pupil premium before the end of the year.
Richard Ottaway: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans he has to reduce the attainment gap between pupils from affluent and poor backgrounds in (a) Croydon South constituency and (b) England. 
Sarah Teather: Reducing the attainment gap between pupils from affluent and poor backgrounds is at the heart of our policy for school improvement, in Croydon South, as elsewhere.
On 15 October, we announced a £7.2 billion Fairness Premium, including a Pupil Premium for schools. The Pupil Premium will target extra funding at the most disadvantaged pupils wherever they live, reducing educational inequalities and ensuring that poorer students receive the support they need to reach their potential.
Chris Skidmore: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what estimate he has made of the number of children in (a) Kingswood constituency and (b) England who will receive the proposed pupil premium. 
Sarah Teather: We are considering the responses to the consultation on school funding which ended on 18 October, including the question of which deprivation indicator to use. The number of children eligible, either in a constituency or in England as a whole, will depend on this decision.
Elizabeth Truss: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what plans he has for the future of the Qualifications and Credit Framework. 
Mr Gibb [holding answer 28 October 2010]: The Department has asked Professor Alison Wolf to carry out an independent review of vocational education. As part of her review Professor Wolf will examine the organisation and funding of vocational education, which will include consideration of the Qualifications and Credit Framework in relation to qualifications for 14 to 19-year-olds She will report in spring 2011.
Damian Hinds: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of raising the participation age to 18 years in (a) 2013, (b) 2014 and (c) 2015. 
Mr Gibb: We are still determining the levels of funding for 16 to 18-year-olds for the years of the spending review period. We remain committed to raising the participation age to 18 by 2015, although reductions in the unit cost of provision will need to be secured. Our aim is to announce the details of the 16-19 settlement and any changes to funding policy that will help deliver this before Christmas and make allocations for the 2011/12 academic year by the end of March 2011.
Matthew Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what estimate he made of the annual cost to the Exchequer of continuing the September School Leaver's Guarantee. 
[holding answer 11 October 2010]: The Government committed to continue the September Guarantee in 2010, offering all 16 and 17-year-olds a suitable place in education or training. The associated
cost to the Exchequer of continuing the Guarantee is the funding provided for those education and training places. Funding for 16-19 education is set out in the Young People's Learning Agency's Grant Letter. In 2010-11, just under £7.2 billion has been allocated for places in schools, colleges and training providers for education and training for 16 to 18-year-olds in the 2010/11 academic year. This total funding provides places for 16, 17 and 18-year-olds, while the September Guarantee covers only 16 and 17-year-olds.
Following the spending review, we announced that we remain committed to full participation and to raising the participation age to 18 by 2015. We aim to announce the details of the 16-19 settlement before Christmas and make allocations for the 2011/12 academic year by the end of March 2011.
Rehman Chishti: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what his policy is on permitting (a) academies and (b) other schools to control their admissions policies. 
Mr Gibb: Admissions policies are set and applied locally by admission authorities. For community and voluntary-controlled schools, this is the local authority. For foundation and voluntary-aided schools, this is the governing body. Academies are responsible for agreeing their own admission policies with the Secretary of State.
Maintained schools, local authorities, Admission Forums and school adjudicators must all act in accordance with the School Admissions Code which has the force of law for maintained schools. For Academies, compliance is through a contractual duty within their funding agreements.
All local authorities are required to have in place a scheme each year for co-ordinating admission arrangements for maintained schools in their area. Academies are required, through their funding agreement, to take part in co-ordination.
Andrew Stephenson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what estimate he has made of his Department's capital expenditure on new school buildings in the next spending review period. 
Mr Gibb: DfE has received a capital allocation of £15.8 billion for 2011-12 to 2014-15. The overall prioritisation and distribution of this funding will be informed by the capital review, which is due to report at the end of the year.
Zac Goldsmith: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many school buildings constructed under the Building Schools for the Future programme received an (a) A, (b) B, (c) C, (d) D, (e) E, (f) F and (g) G grade Display Energy Certificate; how many have yet to be so graded; and what proportion of buildings in the school estate are at each energy efficiency grade. 
The Department does not hold data on how many school buildings constructed under the BSF programme received an A, B, C, D, E, F, and G grade Display Energy Certificate, how many have yet to be so graded and what proportion of buildings in the schools
estate are at each energy efficiency grade. This information is not held centrally and is held by the individual schools. Display Energy Certificates are required under the EU Energy Performance of Buildings Directive and it is the responsibility of the building owner to ensure that they are carried out.
Chi Onwurah: To ask the Secretary of State for Education pursuant to the answer of 6 September 2010, Official Report, column 357W, on Westgate School Newcastle, when he plans to determine whether the funding allocated by Newcastle's capital fund to Westgate Primary School in 2008 will continue. 
Mr Gibb [holding answer 9 November 2010]: Decisions about future capital funding including funding for primary schools will be determined in the light of the capital review announced by the Secretary of State on 5 July 2010. The capital review team will complete its work by the end of the calendar year.
In the comprehensive spending review (CSR) announcement on 20 October 2010, the Chancellor announced that DfE capital spending will be:
Greg Mulholland: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment he has made of the effects of the outcome of the spending review on statutory funding for voluntary sector organisations working with children, young people and families; and if he will make a statement. 
Sarah Teather [holding answer 25 October 2010]: The voluntary sector plays, and will continue to play, a significant role in reforming services for children, young people and families. We are opening up markets and will enable the voluntary sector to become better involved in delivering key services such as children's centres and youth services and we will work with local authorities to ensure that they commission services from the sector.
While the voluntary sector cannot be immune from reductions in public expenditure, the spending review announced that Government will direct around £470 million over the SR period to support capacity building in the sector, including an endowment fund to assist local voluntary and community organisations. As part of this, the Government will provide funds to pilot the National Citizen Service and establish a Transition Fund of £100 million to provide short term support for voluntary sector organisations providing public services. The sector will also be able to access funding from the Big Society Bank, which will bring in private sector funding in addition to receiving all funding available to England from dormant accounts.
Ministers will set out in due course the levels of funding that will be available through the SR period for voluntary sector organisations working with children, young people and families.
Paul Blomfield: To ask the Secretary of State for Education when he expects to make an announcement on the future of those projects which were approved as part of the myplace programme on which work was suspended pending the outcome of the comprehensive spending review. 
Tim Loughton [holding answer 1 November 2010]: The Department for Education has not yet made a decision on funding for youth facilities beyond March 2011. The Government have undertaken a comprehensive spending review and Ministers will announce details on programme level funding, including for the myplace programme, in the coming months.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what plans the Government has for the replacement of G-rated boilers. 
Gregory Barker: A G-rated boiler has a seasonal efficiency of less than 70%. Boiler efficiency has been steadily increased through amendments to the Building Regulations which required the installation of more efficient replacement boilers. The minimum performance requirement of a boiler was increased to 90% in October, when the 2010 amendment to part L of the regulations came into force. Each year, 1.5 million domestic boilers are sold in the UK. As a consequence of building regulations and the clear message that this sends out about the need to replace inefficient boilers, we estimate that there will be virtually no G-rated boilers by 2020.
In addition to regulatory requirements, the replacement of inefficient boilers with a higher efficiency new boiler may be a measure under the Green Deal, provided the savings made over the product's life cover the upfront cost.
Joan Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what assessment he has made of the likely efficacy of carbon sinks by 2050. 
Gregory Barker: In the absence of significant emissions reductions, some weakening of global carbon sinks may occur by the end of this century but complete failure of either land or ocean carbon sinks is very unlikely.
Recent work from the UK AVOID programme, which considers global emissions reductions of 50% by 2050, suggests little change in sink strength by the middle of this century.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what plans he has to reduce carbon dioxide emissions arising from inefficient domestic heating systems; and whether the replacement of inefficient heating systems will be included in the proposed Green Deal. 
Gregory Barker: The Government have committed to reducing household emissions by 29% by 2020.
There are a number of Government initiatives to address inefficient boilers in people's homes. These include our building regulations, the carbon emission reduction target extension to the end of 2012 and Warm Front support for the fuel poor. From June 2011, the renewable heat incentive will also provide support for uptake of renewable heat technologies.
From 2012, our new Green Deal will provide private finance for a range of energy saving measures, which are expected to pay for themselves over a set period of time. Decisions on the specific measures to be included will be taken in due course.
Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what recent research his Department has (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated on the number of G-rated boilers in use in households. 
Gregory Barker: A G-rated boiler has a seasonal efficiency of less than 70%. The boiler population was researched as a part of the work to underpin the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target (CERT) extension. Annex B, Table B7 of the CERT 2011-12 Impact Assessment, published in 2010, points to there being around 3.6 million G-rated boilers in households in 2010. This estimate of population should be reduced by around 119,000 boilers, to take account of those G-rated boilers replaced under the boiler scrappage scheme.
Roger Williams: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change whether the Government's consultation on the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target will include heating systems. 
Gregory Barker: A consultation on the role that appliances, consumer electronics and other low-value items should play in the Carbon Emissions Reduction Target (CERT) scheme will be launched shortly. Heating systems are not part of this consultation and will continue to play a role in the CERT scheme. We will however consider any evidence presented to ensure CERT maximises its contribution to statutory carbon budgets, and this could include low value heating products.
Conor Burns: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what his most recent assessment is of the viability of carbon capture and storage technology; and if he will make a statement. 
Charles Hendry: The individual processes involved in Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) have been demonstrated separately, but the full chain of technologies (capture, transport, and storage) has yet to be demonstrated together at large-scale on a commercial power station. The 2010 International Energy Agency/Carbon Sequestration Leadership Forum Report on CCS to the G8 noted that progress toward commercialisation is being made but that the experience to be gained from the operation of large-scale demonstration projects will be critical to the deployment of CCS.
The Government are committed to providing public sector investment for four CCS demonstration plants, as set out in the Coalition Programme for Government. We announced in the spending review that up to £1 billion will be invested in the first of these projects.
Julian Sturdy: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what his most recent assessment is of progress on development of the UK's carbon capture capabilities. 
Charles Hendry: Earlier this year the Global CCS Institute published work identifying up to 80 large-scale, integrated CCS projects that are active or planned. UK projects featured prominently.
The UK is well-placed to benefit from strengths in engineering expertise and potential for offshore storage of carbon dioxide under the North sea. The Government are determined to capitalise on these advantages and make the UK one of the best places to invest in CCS in the world.
We are committed to providing public sector investment for four CCS demonstration plants, as set out in the coalition programme for government. In the spending review we announced that up to £1 billion will be invested in the first of these projects. This is the largest confirmed commitment to a single commercial-scale CCS project in the world. We are aiming for the first project to be constructed by 2014-15. The competition is progressing, with front-end engineering and design (FEED) studies currently under way.
We recently completed a market sounding exercise to inform the development of the selection process for projects 2-4. We are currently analysing the information gathered and we aim to set out further details regarding our proposals at the end of the year.
We will be developing a CCS Roadmap in consultation with industry and key stakeholders, including the new CCS Development Forum that will identify barriers to commercial deployment of CCS and the actions required to overcome them. We will publish the Roadmap in spring 2011.
Joan Walley: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what his most recent assessment is of the likelihood of restricting a rise in global temperature increase to within 2° C. 
Gregory Barker: The Government are committed to achieving an ambitious global deal to cut emissions consistent with limiting global temperature increases to 2° C, and to helping countries adapt to the inevitable impacts of climate change.
Evidence suggests that the expected increase in global temperatures is likely to be more than 2° C if we do not dramatically increase global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. A number of analyses, including those by the DECC-funded AVOID programme, the London School of Economics and, most recently the EU, have been published in the past year which examine the requirements for limiting temperature rise to below 2° C. These show that the chances of achieving this goal are significantly increased if countries deliver emission reductions which will result in global greenhouse gas emissions reaching an early peak (within the next decade) and falling quickly to at least 50% below 1990 levels in 2050 and even lower levels thereafter.
The pledges submitted to the Copenhagen Accord by over 80 countries, representing about 80% of global emissions, could lead to emissions peaking before 2020 if countries deliver on their high-end pledges in full, although rapid reductions will also be required after 2020 to deliver 2° C
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change which projects on the effect of and adaptation to climate change in China his Department is funding; what the value of these projects is to UK research; and what the financial cost to his Department is of each such project. 
Gregory Barker: DECC is currently contributing funding of £0.5 million over three years to a major multilateral research programme with China on impacts of, and adaptation to, climate change. The programme "Adaptation to Climate Change in China (ACCC)" explores the impacts of a changing climate on Chinese agriculture, water resources, health and disaster management.
The total budget for the programme is £4.8 million with contributions from DFID of £2.5 million and the Swiss Development Agency of £1.8 million.
The programme develops approaches to risk assessment of, and adaptation to climate change for the benefit of developing countries. Working with Chinese scientists in this programme builds on seven years of collaboration between the two countries, which has revealed the extent of climate change impacts on Chinese agriculture and identified approaches to address them. The programme has developed productive links between UK and Chinese researchers, including collaboration between the Met Office Hadley Centre and the China Meteorological Administration.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what collaborative projects on energy technology and energy systems planning his Department is undertaking with China; and what the estimated monetary value is of each such project. 
Gregory Barker: DECC is engaged in a number of projects with China in this area.
The Chinese Advanced Power Plan Carbon Capture Options (CAPPCCO) project is looking to ensure that new power plants can be retrofitted with carbon capture and storage (CCS) technologies. This project is being led by Imperial college, is due to complete in spring 2011 and is valued at £265,000.
A project on Biomass Co-firing has sought to determine the strategic benefits of this technology in China. It has been led by Cranfield university and completed in October this year, at a cost of £270,000.
We are supporting a project in Guangdong Province (SE China) at a cost of £60,000 with additional funding coming from both the Foreign and Commonwealth Office's Strategic Programme Fund and the Global CCS Institute. This project has resulted in CCS being identified as a strategic technology for development.
In addition, the UK continues to be involved in the EU-China Near Zero Emissions Coal project, phase I of which was completed in October 2009. Estimated costs to the European partners of phase II of this project are between €20 million and €50 million.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what strategic co-operation projects on climate change issues his Department is undertaking with China; what estimate he has made of their total monetary value; what further projects have been agreed following his visit to China in November 2010; and what estimate he has made of the number of new green jobs likely to be created in the UK as a result of those agreements. 
Gregory Barker: In terms of existing projects, DECC is supporting a study between Sussex university and Tsinghua university to assess the barriers to the transfer of low carbon energy technology between the UK and China. The aim of the study is to facilitate technological co-operation between developed and developing countries. It is envisaged that the study will help to inform intergovernmental discussions about the development and transfer of low carbon energy technologies. The total cost of this project is £108,000.
In terms of new projects focused on climate change, during my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State's visit, the UK and China agreed to strengthen bilateral policy dialogue and exchange on topics including the use of fiscal measures and market mechanisms to promote low-carbon development and energy efficiency. It was agreed that these topics would be included in a new strand of cooperation activities aimed at sharing practical know-how and policy expertise between the UK and China's low-carbon pilot provinces and cities.
Further details of wider collaboration on green development are set out in the Policy Outcomes Statement of the Economic and Financial Dialogue, which can be found at
In addition during his visit to China, my right hon. Friend opened the first meeting of the UK-China energy dialogue. The dialogue will help to strengthen energy collaboration with China, including in respect of low carbon and renewable energy technologies.
No estimate has yet been made of the number of new green jobs likely to be created in the UK as a result of these agreements and activities.
I have replied separately to the hon. Member's questions in respect of adaptation and technology collaboration.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change with reference to his speech to the GLOBE Forum in Tianjin, China, 7 November 2010, what the evidential basis is of the figure of £3.5 trillion he gave for the monetary value of the global low-carbon and environmental sectors. 
Gregory Barker: This figure is based on the Innovas report, commissioned by the then Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, which stated:
'The global market value of the low-carbon and environmental goods and services (LCEGS) sector was £3,046 billion in 2007-8. Taking into account different growth rates for over 220 global economies, it is estimated that overall the global LCEGS sector grew by approximately 4% in 2007-8.'
Allowing for a 4% year-on-year increase, the 2010-11 value of this sector would be an estimated £3,426 billion.
The full report can be found at:
Valerie Vaz: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what recent discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for (a) Communities and Local Government and (b) Health on the prevention of excess winter deaths in 2010-11. 
Gregory Barker: I have regular discussions with my right hon. Friends the Secretaries of State for Communities and Local Government and for Health on a range of policy issues and will continue to work closely with them as we develop and take forward policy to reduce the incidence of excess winter deaths.
Mr Redwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what regulations his Department plans to (a) repeal and (b) amend in the next five years. 
Gregory Barker: At present, it is too early to project how many regulations will be removed/amended over the course of the next five years.
The Department is exploring ways to minimise the burden of DECC's regulation on UK business without compromising our ability to meet our hugely important goals. To inform this, the noble Lord Marland of Odstock, responsible for the Department's regulatory agenda, wrote to 250 of the Department's key stakeholders asking for their views. The response letter from Lord Marland and a summary of responses to this exercise was published 12 November on the DECC internet site:
So far DECC has identified the following regulations to repeal. The exact process for repealing these is still being explored (a suitable vehicle for repeal needs to be found, and consultation with relevant parties such as the devolved Administrations will need to take place for certain policies), but we are committed to identifying and repealing both redundant and unnecessarily burdensome pieces of regulation where possible. The policies identified for repeal to date are:
Repeal of 18 exemption order regulations from the Radioactive Substances Act (1993). These will be replaced by a reformed, simplified regime.
Repeal of two Electricity and Gas (Energy Efficiency Obligations) Orders (2001 and 2004). These have now been superseded by CERT regulations.
Repeal of the Home Energy Conservation Act, 1995 (HECA), to make way for more targeted intervention in this area, remaining mindful of the important role local authorities play in this agenda and taking this into account in the development of new regulation. This will be repealed in the forthcoming Energy Bill
Repeal of a duty on the Secretary of State to take reasonable steps to ensure that by 2010 the general level of energy efficiency of residential accommodation in England has increased by at least 20% compared with 2000 levels, as this is effectively now redundant, (section 217 Housing Act 2004).
Repeal of the obligation for the building and conversion of oil or gas fired power stations of 10 MW or more to be notified to the Secretary of State (section 14(1) of the Energy Act 1976).
Repeal of the obligation for power station gas contracts of 12 months or more to be notified to the Secretary of State (section 14(2), Energy Act 1976).
Repeal of regulation regarding the employment of horses working underground, now obsolete because no horses or ponies have been employed in mines in the last 10 years (The Coal and Other Mines (Horses) Order 1956).
Repeal of a power to require energy suppliers and generators to provide research and development information to the Government (section 99 (2)-(4), Electricity Act 1989).
Repeal of powers in the 2010 Energy Act to adjust gas and electricity charges to address price discrimination (sections 26-29 Energy Act 2010).
Savings may be fed into the One-in One-Out process as OUTs. Generally, my Department will continue to work to identify further potential OUTs for One-in, One-out.
The Government's regulatory Forward Programme is due to be published later this year which will provide details of forthcoming regulation.
Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change if he will exercise his powers under the Energy Act 2010 to require suppliers to provide social price support to all groups that qualify for cold weather payments and households in receipt of means-tested benefits with children under the age of 16 years. 
Gregory Barker: Energy suppliers will be required from April 2011 to provide greater help with the financial costs of energy bills to more of the most vulnerable fuel poor households, with total support of £250 million in 2011-12 rising to £310 million per annum in 2014-15. The regulations requiring suppliers' participation will be made using powers under the Energy Act 2010.
We intend to consult on the detailed policy design, including eligibility and targeting methods, later this year.
Mr Marsden: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change from what budget the cost of the efficiency review of energy network operators' pension costs will be met; when he expects that review to be completed; and what estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of that review. 
Charles Hendry: The energy regulator Ofgem will shortly formally commission the Government Actuary's Department to undertake an initial review into energy network operators' pension costs in order to ensure that consumers only fund efficiently incurred pension costs. Pension costs can be significant with the recently concluded electricity distribution price control allowing £1.7 billion of funding. This initial review will cost £30,000, which will be met from within Ofgem's existing licence fee income, and is due to be completed by March 2011.
If any pension schemes are identified in this initial review as potentially inefficient they will then be subject to a specific efficiency review. The costs of these subsequent reviews, if required, will also be met from within Ofgem's existing licence fee income.
Simon Kirby: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what steps he is taking to ensure that the Green Deal will be available to households in the private rented sector. 
Gregory Barker: The Green Deal will be available across all housing tenures.
We expect that private landlords will respond positively to the Green Deal as it will remove the upfront costs of energy efficiency measures. The Green Deal enables households to invest in energy efficiency improvements at no upfront cost and repay through energy bills. That means landlords no longer face an expensive outlay for work requested by their tenants. Instead, under the Green Deal, tenants will be able to pay for the work through the savings on their energy bill.
However, if following a review of the performance of the sector, we find landlords are not taking up this offer, we will respond accordingly.
We are seeking to take powers in the Energy Security and Green Economy Bill to require landlords to honour reasonable requests for energy efficiency improvements, where a financial support package is available. It will also allow local authorities to insist that landlords improve the worst performing homes.
Gordon Banks: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills on the European Commission's proposed hybrid clinker benchmark for Phase III of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. 
Gregory Barker: My right hon. Friend the Secretary of State and I discuss a wide range of issues with our colleagues at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills from time to time. These discussions include the implications of EU legislation for UK business. Our officials are in regular dialogue with the cement industry in order that we may understand fully the implications of the European Commission's proposal for the free allocation rules for Phase III of the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) for the UK economy before any decisions are taken.
Karl Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what the remit of his Department's review of fuel poverty will be; and when he expects it to report. 
Gregory Barker: The spending review included an announcement that the Government intend to initiate an independent review of the fuel poverty target and definition before the end of the year. This is in the context of our commitment to focus available resources where they will be most effective in tackling the problems underlying fuel poverty. We will announce more details on the proposed review, including duration and remit, before the end of the year.
Chi Onwurah: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how much capital funding for the proposed Green Deal he expects to be contributed by private sector companies. 
Gregory Barker: We anticipate the Green Deal will be entirely privately financed, although we are reshaping the energy company obligation to ensure that there is additional support for low income and vulnerable households, and to help meet the costs of securing energy efficiency in properties that are harder to treat.
The scale of the financial requirement cannot be fully determined ahead of the scheme's implementation; however, the Government envisages wide spread use of Green Deal finance, with the capital requirement running into billions of pounds over time.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change (1) what assessment he has made of the merits of implementing force-to-force security protection exercises at UK nuclear installations; and what discussions he has had with his US counterpart on the effectiveness of such exercises at US civil and military nuclear facilities; 
(2) what assessment he has made of the adequacy of physical protection measures at UK nuclear installations against attack from laser-guided anti-tank shoulder-fired weapons; 
(3) if he will discuss with his Russian counterpart the force-on-force security system tests on purpose-built dummy reactor buildings which Russian security forces have conducted using AT14 Kornet/Spriggen weapons. 
Charles Hendry: Security at UK civil nuclear sites is kept under continuous review to ensure its effectiveness and arrangements take account of international guidance and best practice. In assessing the level of threat to these sites from a malicious attack, the industry's regulator, the Office for Civil Nuclear Security (OCNS), gives full consideration to the available intelligence on the methods, capabilities and intentions of terrorist groups and potential adversaries therefore enabling appropriate physical protection and other security measures to be put into place. The Government do not comment on the detail of security matters at civil nuclear sites.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change (1) what consideration he has given to introducing a requirement for anti-spall protective coating on external surfaces of nuclear power plants and associated on-site radioactive waste stores; 
(2) what assessment he has made of the adequacy of security measures at nuclear energy installations against the use of recoilless guns firing kinetic munitions; 
(3) what assessment he has made of the adequacy of security protective measures at coastal located nuclear installations against malevolent paramilitary terrorist attack from ship-fired (a) Chinese-manufactured c-802 missiles, (b) French-manufactured MILAN missiles, (c) Iranian-manufactured Toophan missiles and (d) US-manufactured TOW missiles; 
(4) what estimate he has made of the resilience of UK civil nuclear installations against malevolent paramilitary terrorist attacks. 
Charles Hendry: I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave her today to Questions 23438,23439 and 23440.
Stephen Barclay: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what assessment he has made of the prospects of reaching the 2020 target for renewable electricity generation. 
Charles Hendry [holding answer 12 November 2010]: The Renewable Energy Directive 2009 sets the UK a legally binding target to ensure that 15% of our energy (electricity, heat and transport) comes from renewable sources by 2020.
Analysis published in 2009 demonstrated that while our target is challenging, it is achievable. We are committed to creating the right conditions for companies to invest in renewable energy projects, including the provision of appropriate incentives and the removal of financial barriers.
Graeme Morrice: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what funding his Department has allocated in respect of (a) the renewable heating initiative and (b) the feed-in tariff scheme to take account of the implementation of proposals contained in the comprehensive spending review in (i) 2011-12 and (ii) 2012-13. 
Charles Hendry: The spending review confirmed that the feed-in tariff would continue as planned for 2010-11 to 2013-14. For 2014-15, the Government have committed to finding savings of 10% on previous plans. These will be introduced as part of the scheduled review unless deployment under the scheme is significantly higher than expected.
The spending review confirmed that the renewable heat incentive will go ahead from 2011, with savings found of 5%, 10%, 15% and 20% for 2011-12 to 2014-15
respectively, relative to the proposals that the previous administration consulted on in February. Spending through the scheme is expected to exceed £850 million over the spending review period. The spending review announced this would be funded directly by government, instead of through the overly complex renewable heat levy.
The Office for Budget Responsibility is planning to publish its forecasts for spending through both schemes with its autumn forecast on 29 November.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what contracts have been placed with (a) the Energy Savings Trust and (b) the Carbon Trust to advise on implementation of (i) energy savings plans and (ii) sustainable development programmes in Government Departments; and what the monetary value has been of each such contract since May 2010. 
Gregory Barker: Neither the Energy Saving Trust nor the Carbon Trust have contracts with Government Departments for advice relating to energy savings plans or sustainable development plans.
The Carbon Trust is supporting 10 Government Departments as well as executive agencies and non-departmental public bodies in developing and implementing energy saving plans as part of its central Government Carbon Management Service which launched in May 2010. The costs of providing this service are met from the core grant which DECC has provided to the Carbon Trust for 2010-11.
Rehman Chishti: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what research his Department has undertaken into mechanisms to measure offshore wind speed. 
Charles Hendry: The Meteorological Office measures offshore wind speeds, using its network of Marine Automatic Weather Stations and assimilates information from satellites into its weather forecasting model to estimate wind speeds.
Information on offshore wind speed, based on modelling work by the Meteorological Office, is available in the Atlas of Marine Renewable Energy Resources. This was last published by the then Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (now BIS) in 2007 and can be accessed at:
For individual sites, offshore wind farm developers undertake their own wind speed studies and these results are required to be submitted under lease conditions imposed by The Crown Estate.
Kate Hoey: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what (a) representations he has received from and (b) meetings he has had with representatives of Caribbean communities about the proposed changes to air passenger duty; 
(2) what estimate he has made of the likely level of revenue which will accrue from the implementation of the proposed changes to air passenger duty for flights to the Caribbean; 
(3) what assessment his Department has made of the implementation of the proposed changes to air passenger duty on the annual number of (a) passengers travelling and (b) trips taken to the Caribbean from the UK. 
Justine Greening: The June Budget stated that the Government will explore changes to the aviation tax system, including switching from a per-passenger to a per-plane duty. Major changes will be subject to consultation.
Since June, I have received representations and met with a number of stakeholder and industry groups, including representatives from the Caribbean countries.
Pat Glass: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) for what reason he changed the proposed £20 billion threshold for the bank levy to a £20 billion allowance; 
(2) what assessment his Department has made of the effect on the Exchequer of his decision to implement the bank levy on the basis of a £20 billion (a) threshold and (b) allowance. 
Mr Hoban: Details of the Government's decision to introduce an allowance on the first £20 billion of relevant liabilities were set out in chapter 3 of the Government's consultation response published alongside the draft legislation on 21 October.
This is available on HM Treasury website:
Thomas Docherty: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what (a) regulations and (b) guidance govern the maximum period within which banks and building societies must issue final payments when requests are made to close accounts. [R] 
Mr Hoban: The rules governing maximum payment periods, including on the closure of an account are set out in the EU's Payment Services Regulations 2009.
There are separate rules for the different types of account and different types of payment.
Regulation 72 of the Payment Services Regulations provides that cash deposited by a consumer in a payment account, such as a current account, must be made available to the consumer immediately. The regulations also set specific times for making payments to a person's payment account. The regulations do not apply to accounts, such as some savings accounts, that do not provide a payment service.
When closing one account in order to switch to another account, the Financial Services Authority's (FSA) rules say that both the old and new banks must provide a prompt and efficient service. Guidance issued by the banking industry calls funds to be dispatched in line
with the customer's instructions on the day an account is closed, promptly and where possible by same working day. The guidance also calls for switching a current account to be completed within 10 working days. Switching a cash ISA may take up to 30 days. However, industry has committed to bring this down to 15 working days by the end of 2010.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer which body is responsible for evaluating the environmental sustainability of budget proposals; and if he will make a statement. 
Justine Greening: The Treasury is responsible for assessing the environmental impacts of Budget proposals. The exact environmental impact of the spending review will depend on the decisions of individual Departments, as set out in box 2.4 of the spending review document.
Jake Berry: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he plans to bring forward proposals for sector-specific regulation of retail foreign currency exchange services. 
Mr Hoban: The administrators are reviewing the trading operations of Crown Currency Exchange, its financial position and the conduct of its directors. Once the administrators have reported, the Government will look closely at this case to see what lessons need to be learned from the failure of the company.
Paul Flynn: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the amount his Department paid in child benefit in respect of families of those paying income tax at the higher rate in the latest period for which figures are available; and if he will estimate the increase in the higher rate of income tax required to accrue the equivalent sum to the Exchequer. 
Mr Gauke: The amount HMRC is estimated to be paying in child benefit in respect of families of those paying income tax at the higher rate in 2010-11 is £2.0 billion.
The increase in the higher rate of income tax required to accrue the equivalent sum to the Exchequer is around 2%.
Patrick Mercer: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his Department assessed the merits of using a system of means-testing similar to that used for the allocation of tax credits in developing its proposals for changes in the administration of child benefit. 
Mr Gauke: The Government consider a range of options when formulating policy. The Chancellor announced that child benefit will be withdrawn from families containing a higher rate taxpayer from January 2013, as it is not fair for those earning just £15,000 or £30,000 to go on paying the child benefit of those earning £50,000 or £100,000 and that no further changes to child benefit are required.
Mr Umunna: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the number of mothers who will lose their entitlement to a state pension as a result of the withdrawal of child benefit from couples with a higher rate taxpayer. 
Mr Hoban: The withdrawal of child benefit from families containing a higher rate taxpayer will not affect national insurance credits for state pension entitlement.
Cathy Jamieson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many people in (a) Scotland, (b) East Ayrshire and (c) Kilmarnock and Loudoun constituency cease to be eligible to claim child benefit as a result of being in the higher tax allowance bracket. 
Mr Gauke: The number of households affected by the withdrawal of child benefit from families with a higher rate tax payer in 2013 in Scotland is estimated to be about 120,000.
Information on household income for child benefit claimants is not available at geographical levels below Government office region.
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what aspects of the reforms to the welfare system announced in (a) the June Budget 2010 and (b) the Comprehensive Spending Review (CSR) were (i) included and (ii) not included in his Department's modelling of the distributional analysis of the outcomes of the CSR. 
Mr Gauke: The policies that could be modelled account for around two-thirds of tax, tax credit and benefit changes coming into effect in 2012-13. These are measures for which there are sufficiently robust data to attribute changes in tax, tax credits or benefits to individuals. The full list of modelled measures can be found in the 'Spending Review 2010: Distributional Impact Analysis-data sources' document. The full list of welfare measures announced in the June Budget 2010 can be found in Table 2.1 of the 'Budget 2010' document; the full list of welfare measures announced in the spending review 2010 can be found in Table 3 of the 'Spending Review 2010' document.
John Mann: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the corporation tax receipts from each business sector were in each of the last three years. 
Mr Gauke: Historical figures for corporation tax receipts paid by several broadly-defined business sectors are regularly updated and published in Table 11.1, on the HMRC National Statistics website. The latest update is available here:
Helen Jones: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer on how many occasions HM Revenue and Customs was contacted with concerns about Crown Currency Exchange Limited before its collapse; and which (a) organisations and (b) individuals made such contacts. 
Mr Hoban: All information received by HM Revenue and Customs is carefully considered and where it relates to HMRC's responsibilities action is taken as appropriate. However, section 18 of the Commissioners of Revenue and Customs Act 2005 does not permit HM Revenue and Customs to comment on the affairs of individual customers.
Mr Redwood: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what regulations his Department plans to (a) repeal and (b) amend in the next five years. 
Justine Greening: The Government's regulatory Forward Programme is due to be published later this year and will provide details of all forthcoming regulation.
My Department is reviewing the pipeline of legislation inherited from the previous administration and much of this work is well advanced. We will work to identify regulations that could be removed to comply with "One in One out"-the Government's commitment that new regulation will be offset by a corresponding equivalent reduction in regulatory burdens.
Paul Uppal: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the number of people that will be affected by his decision not to include Equitable Life with-profits annuitants who drew their pension before September 1992 in his proposed compensation scheme. 
Mr Hoban: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave my hon. Friend the Member for Cotswold (Geoffrey Clifton-Brown) on 9 November, Official Report, column 286W.
Mr Llwyd: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the written ministerial statement of 20 October 2010, Official Report, columns 54-56WS, on the Equitable Life Payment Scheme, for what reason with profits annuitants with Equitable Life who opened their policies before 1 September 1992 will not be recompensed for their relative losses. 
Mr Hoban [holding answer 8 November 2010]: This Government are committed to implementing the Parliamentary Ombudsman's recommendation to introduce a fair and transparent payments scheme to Equitable Life policyholders for their relative loss as a result of regulatory failure. With Profits Annuitants (WPAs) who took out policies before 1 September 1992 did so before any maladministration could have affected their decisions, so suffered no relative loss and therefore have not been included in the Government's proposed payment scheme.
Dr Pugh: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer (1) what progress has been made towards the target of £30 billion of efficiency savings set in the 2007 comprehensive spending review; 
(2) which Departments (a) met and (b) did not meet efficiency savings targets agreed with his Department in each of the last three financial years. 
Danny Alexander: £14.7 billion of efficiency savings were reported by Departments in their 2010 spring departmental reports, showing that less than 50% of the £35 billion target savings had been achieved two years into a three-year programme.
The NAO audited a sample of the reported savings and, in its compendium report on the CSR07 VFM programme (HC 291), described just over one-third of these savings as genuine. Applied to the reported savings, this would imply that only £5.59 billion are genuine-less than 20% of the £35 billion target savings.
The NAO further noted HC 291 that:
"Our recurring concerns and the slower than expected progress reported to date mean it is unlikely that departments will deliver £35bn of savings which fully meet the CSR07 criteria."
and this target-based approach had:
"not made a significant impact on how departments do their business"
"complex and sometimes counter-intuitive criteria."
The Government announced in spending review 2010 a more specific and innovative approach to efficiency and reform across the public sector, including:
a reduction in administration budgets of 34% across the whole of Whitehall and its arm's length bodies saving £5.9 billion a year by 2014-15;
radically reducing the number of arm's length bodies across government; and
the Efficiency and Reform Group's tough new efficiency regime which will drive savings in procurement, major projects and estate management.
As a result, Departments will no longer be required to report against the previous Government's failed efficiency target.
Steve Baker: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the reasons are for the difference between the estimate of the surplus of the National Insurance Fund published by the Government Actuary's Department in January 2010 and the National Insurance Fund balance invested, as recorded by the Debt Management Office. 
Mr Gauke: The Government Actuary's Department (GAD) estimate in January 2010 was based on a number of assumptions, including the HM Treasury pre-Budget report published in December 2009. As actual outturn contribution receipts for 2009-10 were lower than GAD's estimate, the amount available to be deposited by the National Insurance Fund (NIF) into the Investment Account by the UK Debt Management Office (DMO) on behalf of the NIF was consequently lower than GAD's estimate. The DMO account shows the actual cash held in the fund as at 31 March 2010 and is not influenced by the GAD estimate.
John McDonnell: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer pursuant to the answer of 4 November 2010, Official Report, column 906W, on personal income, when he expects HM Revenue and Customs to publish data relating to the number of millionaires residing in the UK in each year since 2005; and what proportion of millionaires' income tax liability was collected in each year since 2000-01. 
Mr Gauke: HMRC are currently consulting users on a proposed new methodology for the personal wealth statistics, which closes in January 2011. Depending on the outcome of the consultation, HMRC hope to be able to publish updated wealth statistics in 2011.
More recent wealth information is already available from the Office for National Statistics' Wealth and Asset Survey:
However, the report focuses on wealth at a household level and does not contain an estimate of the number of millionaires.
Information on the proportion of millionaires' income tax liability that was collected in each year since 2000-01 is not available.
John Stevenson: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what private finance initiative schemes there are in Carlisle constituency. 
Danny Alexander: A list of signed and in procurement PFI projects can be found on HM Treasury's website at:
For each PFI project, this list details the project name, the capital value, the constituency, the procuring authority and whether it is on or off balance sheet; as used by the ONS in calculating public sector net debt.
This indicates that there are currently three closed PFI projects in Carlisle;
1. The Carlisle Northern Development Route;
2. The A69 Carlisle to Newcastle; and
3. The Cumberland Infirmary (North Cumbria University Hospitals NHS Trust).
Julian Smith: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the bank accounts used by HM Revenue and Customs have faster payment banking facilities. 
Mr Gauke: HMRC does not operate faster payment banking facilities. When the Faster Payments Service (FPS) was introduced in 2008 the Bank of England was HMRC's main banking supplier. The Bank of England had already taken a strategic decision to withdraw from the provision of retail banking services and consequently did not join the FPS. HMRC's new banking suppliers are RBS and Citibank, both are members of the FPS. HMRC has outline plans to develop its capacity to deliver faster payments; however, other departmental priorities mean it has not been possible to commission the necessary system changes to facilitate this. HMRC continues to keep this under review and will seek to develop its capacity to deliver faster payments when resources allow.
Gregg McClymont: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will take steps to ensure that staff working in the Debt Management Telephone Centre business unit of HM Revenue and Customs are consulted on working hours to be scheduled for (a) 25 December 2010 and (b) 26 December 2010. 
Mr Gauke: HMRC have concluded that there is no business need for its Debt Management Telephone Centres to open on 25 and 26 December 2010. Discussions have already been held with both staff and unions about the associated working hours and leave arrangements.
Mike Freer: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what estimate he has made of the average annual (a) number and (b) proportion of higher-rate taxpayers who are subject to an HM Revenue and Customs tax inspection. 
Mr Gauke: There are approximately 3.1 million higher- rate taxpayers. Any risks identified in the returns of these individuals are largely handled by Local Compliance. Without incurring disproportionate cost we are unable to breakdown the proportion of interventions that we carry out specifically to isolate the higher rate taxpayers.
Mr Crausby: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what recent discussions he has had with pensioners' groups on the future of national free travel for pensioners. 
Mr Hoban: Treasury Ministers and officials have discussions with a wide variety of organisations in the public and private sectors as part of the process of policy development and delivery. As was the case with previous Administrations, it is not the Government's practice to provide details of all such discussions.
Mr Sanders: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how many households were means-tested for tax credit eligibility in 2009-10; and what the cost to HM Revenue and Customs was of such testing. 
Mr Gauke: Eligibility for tax credits is defined in the Tax Credits Act 2002 and tax credits regulations. Other than those claimants who are in receipt of income support, income-based jobseeker's allowance, income-based employment and support allowance and the state pension credit, all tax credits awards are automatically calculated by reference to annual household income. It is not possible therefore to identify the cost of determining eligibility for tax credits.
Mr Frank Field: To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has made a recent estimate of the proportion of working single mothers receiving tax credits who work ( a) 16, (b) 17 to 20, (c) 21 to 25 and (d) over 25 hours a week. 
Mr Gauke: The information, as of April 2010, is provided in the following table:
|Weekly hours worked by single mother||Number of single mothers||Percentage of all working single mothers in tax credits|
Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Health pursuant to the contribution of the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Health on 2 November 2010, Official Report, column 899, which two independent sector abortions providers will meet the Parliamentary Under Secretary of State; if he will place in the Library a copy of (a) the agenda, (b) any material produced for the meeting and (c) a note of the meeting; and if he will make a statement. 
Anne Milton: I will be meeting with the British Pregnancy Advisory Service and Marie Stopes International on 29 November 2010. Following this meeting, I will place the requested information in the Library.
Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what estimate he has made of likely average waiting times in accident and emergency departments in each of the next five years. 
Mr Simon Burns: No estimate has been made of likely average waiting times over the next five years for accident and emergency (A&E) departments in England. While the Department recognises the importance of timeliness, quality of care requires consideration of a broader set of issues. For this reason, we plan to introduce new clinical quality indicators for A&E departments in April 2011, to replace the current four hour waiting time process target. These will look at quality of care as a whole, including timeliness.
Mr Baron: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what recent assessment he has made of the accuracy of diagnoses of cancer in the NHS of those aged 65 years and over; and what research he has (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated on the relationship between age and accuracy of cancer diagnoses; 
(2) what recent assessment he has made of the factors underlying the outcomes of cancer treatment in those aged 65 years and over; and if he will make a statement. 
Paul Burstow: As part of the work of the Department's National Awareness and Early Diagnosis Initiative, the National Cancer Action Team supported the Royal College of General Practitioners and the University of Durham to undertake a national audit of cancer diagnosis in primary care to identify ways to improve clinical practice and service delivery.
The audit has enabled local analysis of the factors that influence diagnosis in primary care. Full analysis has not yet been completed, and therefore no central assessment has yet been made of the relationship between age and diagnosis in primary care based on these data. It is anticipated that the findings of the report will be available in spring 2011.
The Department is working with Macmillan Cancer Support on a jointly funded project that aims to understand barriers to treatment and to improve appropriate intervention rates for people over 70 who have a cancer diagnosis. The pilot programme aims to identify, test and evaluate ways to assess an older person for cancer treatment; to provide practical support and information to aid patient/practitioner decision making; and to train professionals involved in the pathway to promote age equality and address age discrimination.
It is anticipated that the pilot projects will run for a 12-month period with the pilots taking place between May 2011 and April 2012. We will then evaluate whether the approaches tested can have a positive impact on intervention and mortality rates for older people.
Grahame M. Morris: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of the adequacy of the regulation regime for care home fees; and whether his Department has assessed the merit of imposing an upper limit to prevent excessive fees. 
Paul Burstow: Care home fees are not regulated.
Contracts between care homes and people who arrange their own care are a matter for the homeowner and the individual resident.
Almost all care homes are run by the independent sector. For local authority supported residents, contracting arrangements between local authorities and independent sector care homes are a matter for local negotiation. The Government do not set or recommend the level of the fees that local authorities pay.
It would not be appropriate for the Government to interfere in commercial decisions by private businesses about the level of fees they negotiate with individuals and organisations for providing care.
Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many reports on care homes on the Care Quality Commission website were issued (a) up to six months ago, (b) up to one year ago, (c) up to 18 months ago and (d) over two years ago . 
Paul Burstow: The Care Quality Commission (CQC) has provided the following information.
The CQC website hosts the following reports on providers of adult social care, as at 11 November 2010 and based on the date of publication of the report.
|Age of report||Number of reports|
CQC has also advised that it holds an additional 199 reports that are not included in the total above because CQC is not able to put them in date order due to lack of data.
Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for Health if he will review the provision of information on the Care Quality Commission website on the inspection of care homes to ensure that it is up-to-date. 
Paul Burstow: The Care Quality Commission (CQC) is the independent regulator of health and adult social care for England.
CQC inspection reports reflect an inspection made at a given point in time. When a new report is published, the previous report is not out of date; it becomes a historic record that continues to be available. Reports are presented in chronological order and are clearly date stamped.
Any report not on CQC's website can be requested through CQC's contact centre.
Rosie Cooper: To ask the Secretary of State for Health how many care homes had not been inspected by the Care Quality Commission by the due date for such inspections in the latest period for which figures are available. 
Paul Burstow: Under the Care Standards Act 2000, the Care Quality Commission (CQC) was required to carry out an inspection of care homes every three years.
CQC took over from the Commission for Social Care Inspection, the Healthcare Commission and the Mental Health Act Commission as the independent regulator of health and adult social care on 1 April 2009.
CQC has advised that, according to its records, since 1 April 2009, 10 care homes have not had an inspection within a three-year period of the previous inspection. All other care homes in England have had an inspection within the required three-year period.
Of those 10 care homes, four had an inspection during 2010.
Since 1 October 2010, care homes have been regulated under the new framework introduced by the Health and Social Care Act 2008. The 2008 Act does not specify a due date for inspections, but CQC is required to act in a way that is targeted and proportionate to the risks against which it affords safeguards.
|Next Section||Index||Home Page|