Magistrates Courts: Closures
Mr Sanders: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice when he expects to lay before Parliament an Order to provide for the merging of magistrates benches in England. [47084]
Mr Djanogly: I expect to lay such an Order in late April.
Members: Correspondence
Tessa Jowell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice when he plans to reply to the letter of 18 February 2011 from the right hon. Member for Dulwich and West Norwood, on retrospective limited compensation to victims of terrorism abroad, including Nigel Pike. [46422]
Mr Kenneth Clarke: I have received this correspondence and will reply shortly.
Offenders: Berkshire
Alok Sharma: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what proportion of offenders released from prison who are resident in (a) Reading West constituency, (b) Reading, (c) Berkshire and (d) England (i) entered employment and (ii) claimed out-of-work benefits within six months of release in each of the last 10 years. [46598]
Mr Blunt: Information on offenders' employment and benefit status post sentence is not collected centrally. The Ministry of Justice, the Department for Work and Pensions and HM Revenue and Customs have established a joint data sharing project to produce similar statistics to help policy development to improve employment outcomes and reduce reoffending.
The aim of this one-off project is to get a better understanding of reoffending and long-term outcomes for offenders by linking MoJ administrative data from the police national computer (PNC) extract and prisons and probation data to administrative data from DWP
15 Mar 2011 : Column 188W
and HMRC on benefits and employment. This data share is currently developmental but it is hoped that it will be published and made available later in 2011.
Prison Accommodation
Sadiq Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what size of prison population is required to trigger Operation Safeguard. [46972]
Mr Blunt: Operation Safeguard is required when the size or distribution of the prison population is such that it can no longer be managed within the available capacity.
Pressures in managing the population arise from a number of factors. These include the size of particular demographic sections of the prison population and capacity available to accommodate those segments, the geographic distribution of population between regions and NOMS ability to transfer prisoners to maximise the use of space, and whether there are any sudden local increases in population or losses of accommodation. As the total population approaches within approximately 1% of the prison estate’s useable operational capacity, the risk of potentially requiring police cells under Operation Safeguard increases and more rigorous assessment of population pressures is required.
Prisoners: Finance
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prisoners were on the (a) basic, (b) standard and (c) enhanced tier of the Incentives and Earned Privileges scheme (IEP) in each of the last five years; what the cost to the public purse was of operating the scheme in each such year; and how many prisoners were (a) not on, (b) ineligible for and (c) removed from the scheme in each such year. [46836]
Mr Blunt: The numbers of prisoners on each level of the Incentives and Earned Privileges scheme (IEPS) for the last five years is set out in the following table below. The data are drawn from different systems and also represent an average; therefore the figures do not precisely match population figures. However, they do provide an indication at national level of the operation of IEPS.
|
|
Basic | Standard | Enhanced |
The national policy framework is set out in Prison Service Order (PSO) 4000 Incentives and Earned Privileges (available in the Library of the House). Prison governors have devolved responsibility to devise their own local scheme to meet the needs of the prison regime. The scheme is an integral part of prisoner management and the costs of operating it cannot be separately identified.
The IEPS applies to all prisoners but governors may exempt from the scheme prisoners who have progressed onto a structured resettlement programme for whom other forms of incentive will apply. No prisoners are removed from the scheme but they may have certain privileges removed for a specified period as a punishment.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 189W
Prisoners: Gender Recognition
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 3 March 2011, Official Report, column 578W, on prisoners: gender recognition, which (a) internal and (b) external stakeholders were consulted on Prison Service Instruction 07/2011 on the care and management of transsexual prisoners; and how the external stakeholders were selected. [46343]
Mr Blunt: Operational staff and relevant policy teams within the National Offender Management Service were consulted on Prison Service Instruction 07/2011 on the care and management of transsexual prisoners. Officials within the Ministry of Justice, Home Office, Department of Health, and Government Equalities Office were also consulted.
The following external stakeholders were consulted: operators of contracted prisons; unions; HM Chief Inspector of Prisons; Equality and Human Rights Commission; Gender Trust; Beaumont Society.
The external stakeholders were either asked to be part of the consultation or were selected on the basis of potential interest in the Instruction.
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice pursuant to the answer of 3 March 2011, Official Report, column 578W, on prisoners: gender recognition, what plans he has for the implementation of Prison Service Instruction 07/2011 on the care and management of transsexual prisoners, including associated training for staff; and what timetable he has set for implementation. [46344]
Mr Blunt: Prison Service Instruction 07/2011 on the care and management of transsexual prisoners was issued on 2 March 2011. Establishments must comply with the instruction from 14 March 2011.
The instruction is intended to be self-explanatory and there will be no specific training about it for staff. The relevant policy teams at National Offender Management Service headquarters are available to provide advice. Establishments may identify a need for more general training about gender reassignment and the prevention of transphobia for staff working with transsexual prisoners and this will be provided by the relevant policy teams or sourced from external providers as necessary.
Probation: Finance
Helen Goodman: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the planned expenditure is for each probation trust in (a) 2009-10, (b) 2010-11, (c) 2011-12, (d) 2012-13 and (e) 2013-14. [46459]
Mr Blunt: The following table provides expenditure for each probation trust/board in 2009-10 and forecast expenditure for 2010-11.
| £ million | |||
| Area | Probation trust/(board) | 2009-10 | 2010-11 |
15 Mar 2011 : Column 190W
| (1) Indicates a merged trust. | |||
15 Mar 2011 : Column 191W
The National Offender Management Service is currently in the process of finalising budget allocations for 2011-12. Given the demanding settlement the department received we are continuing to finalise our savings plans for the remainder of the spending review period, once we have completed this process we will look to provide firm business group allocations for the future years of the SR period—this is likely to include the overall funding envelope for probation.
Victims: Crime
Clive Efford: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what arrangements are in place to provide support and advice to UK citizens who are the victims of crime in other EU member states; and if he will make a statement; [46974]
(2) what discussions he has had on support for victims of crime who are UK citizens travelling in other EU member states; and if he will make a statement. [46975]
Mr Blunt: The Ministry of Justice is the lead Department for the provision of support for within the UK and for EU victim policy. The Foreign and Commonwealth Office provide consular assistance to UK citizens who are the victims of crime in other EU member states.
There are two main pieces of European Union legislation in place in relation to support for victims of crime: the 2001 Framework Decision on the standing of victims in criminal proceedings, which requires member states to ensure a minimum level of support to victims irrespective of the member state in which they are and the 2004 directive on cross-border co-operation on criminal injuries compensation. The directive requires all member states to have a compensation scheme for victims of “intentional violent crime” and ensures that compensation is accessible regardless of where in the EU a person becomes a victim of crime by creating a system of co-operation between national authorities.
The Ministry of Justice is currently engaged in negotiations on a proposed directive to combat the sexual abuse, sexual exploitation of children and child pornography which includes proposals which provide for a range of support and assistance to address the need of child victims during and after criminal proceedings
The European Commission is due to propose a package of measures relating to victims of crime in May 2011. This will include a directive that will replace the 2001 Framework Decision. The Ministry of Justice responded to a consultation held by the European Commission to inform the content of the proposals and we are having preliminary discussions with our EU counterparts.
Young Offender Institutions
Karl Turner: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) what assessment he has made of provision for 18 to 20-year-old young offenders in the secure estate; and if he will make a statement; [45762]
(2) whether he has any plans to assign any existing capacity within the young adult young offender institution secure estate for use by all adults; [45763]
(3) which young adult young offender institutions have been assigned to the adult secure estate in each of the last three years; [45764]
15 Mar 2011 : Column 192W
(4) what his policy is on young adult offenders in the secure estate. [45853]
Mr Blunt: Young adults sentenced to detention in a young offender institution (DYOI) are detained in young offender institutions (YOIs) as required by section 98 of the Powers of the Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. These are normally self-contained but in some instances are situated within an adult prison with which they share the majority of their facilities. Whatever the location, young adults detained in YOIs have separate sleeping accommodation and are always managed in accordance with the YOI rules.
We are committed to retaining specific provision within the secure estate for young adult offenders. Our “Breaking the Cycle” Green Paper (consultation closed 4 March), sets out a broad reform agenda to drive improved results for all offenders in the secure estate, including young adults.
Prison capacity and the role and function of individual establishments are kept under review to ensure that the prison estate is best configured to meet population needs as effectively and efficiently as possible. Consideration of changes to the different roles of individual establishments within the overall estate is undertaken on an ongoing basis.
In the last three years, two establishments have been re-roled from young offender institutions to adult training prisons: YOIs Castington and Huntercombe were re-roled in 2010 following the decommissioning of places at these establishments by the Youth Justice Board.
Youth Offending Teams
Clive Efford: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what assessment he has made of the potential effect of reductions to youth offending team budgets on levels of reoffending and antisocial behaviour involving young people in each local authority area; and if he will make a statement. [46977]
Mr Blunt: No specific assessment has been made by central Government of the effect of potential budget reductions on youth reoffending and antisocial behaviour in each local authority area.
It is for local areas to use their resources in the most effective way to meet local priorities. The proposals set out in the Ministry of Justice Green Paper in December are intended to incentivise local authorities to take on fuller responsibility for young people in the justice system. Through payment by results mechanisms, we will reward those areas that invest in the kind of prevention and rehabilitation work that is effective at stopping offending.
Clive Efford: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what criteria he used to allocate resources for youth offending teams over the comprehensive spending review period; and if he will make a statement. [46978]
Mr Djanogly: The following criteria will be used for calculating funding for Youth Offending Teams in 2011-12.
The Youth Justice Board is in the process of consulting with funding Departments and Youth Offending Teams to establish a revised funding formula to be implemented from 2012-13.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 193W
The “core” funding pot is split into two: 5/90ths to an overall Welsh pot and 85/90ths to an English pot—this is referred to as the “Barnett” formula.
The “Funding Formulae” are then applied to allocate funding to English and Welsh YOTs. Two different formulas are used, one for England and one for Wales.
Each formula takes into account the following factors:
50% of the formula is based on six summary indicators taken from the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2004, published by the Department for Communities and Local Government. The six indicators include the following:
Extent—Proportion of a YOT’s population living in the wards which rank within the most deprived 10% of wards in the country.
Local Concentration—Local Concentration is the population weighted average of the ranks of a YOT’s most deprived wards that contain exactly 10% of the YOT’s population.
Average SOA Score—Population weighted average of the combined scores for the wards in a YOT.
Average SOA Rank—Population weighted average of the combined ranks for the wards in a YOT.
Number of Employment Deprived—The Employment Scale score is a count of the numbers of individuals experiencing employment deprivation.
Number of Income Deprived—The Income Scale score is a count of the numbers of individuals experiencing this deprivation.
40% of the formula is based on the 10 to 17-year-old population.
10% is based on geographical size of the area.
40% of the formula is based on seven indicators taken from the Welsh Assembly Index of Multiple Deprivation 2005 published by the Welsh Assembly Government. These include income, employment, housing, access to services, health, environment and education.
50% of the formula is based on the 10 to 17-year-old population.
10% is based on YOT caseload data which are provided by YOTs and is the number of young offenders resident in each YOT area.
Funding is also given to YOTs for:
Intensive Supervision and Surveillance Programme.
Keeping Young People Engaged.
Welsh YOTs also receive the following funding:
“Splash” funding which covers prevention activities and is split equally between all 18 YOTs in Wales.
Substance misuse funding.
Clive Efford: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what funding he has allocated to youth offending teams in each local authority area; and if he will make a statement. [46976]
Mr Blunt: Youth offending teams (YOTs) are yet to be formally notified of their funding allocations from central Government for 2011-12. Government Departments are in the process of finalising their funding contributions to the Youth Justice Board. This is expected within the next 14 days after which the Youth Justice Board will send formal notification to each YOT and their local authority colleagues.
Throughout the last six months, the Youth Justice Board have kept YOTs informed on progress with funding negotiations and, in the absence of final confirmation, each YOT was recently sent an indicative amount of the likely allocation to assist in their planning for the forthcoming financial year.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 194W
Environment, Food and Rural Affairs
Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund
Annette Brooke: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will reverse her decision to withdraw the Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund. [46987]
Richard Benyon: The decision to withdraw the Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund (ALSF) will not be reversed; the ALSF programme of work will indeed be discontinued after the financial year ending 31 March 2011. This decision was taken as part of the spending review settlement in October 2010 in a very tight spending context where we had to look very carefully across all the Department's priorities to see where we can make best use of available funds.
In 2011-12 the Department will fund a very modest and short-term legacy project to help ensure that the findings from the £60 million already invested in ALSF research and development are accessible to those who can put them into practice and achieve the potential improvements in environmental performance. This will involve bringing together material across numerous research reports and websites into a professional website tool run and maintained by the Minerals Industry Research Organisation.
Biodiversity
Zac Goldsmith: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much her Department spent on biodiversity conservation in (a) England and (b) the UK Overseas Territories in each of the last five years. [45990]
Richard Benyon: Details of expenditure on biodiversity conservation in England are provided in the following table. These figures represent DEFRA programme spend and spend by the wider DEFRA network but do not include staff costs. They also include total agri-environment scheme expenditure and the DEFRA biodiversity research programme, of which a major share is judged to be spent on biodiversity in England.
| Estimated public expenditure by DEFRA network organisations on biodiversity conservation in England | |||||
| £ million | |||||
|
|
2005-06 | 2006-07 | 2007-08 | 2008-09 | 2009-10 |
| (1)Totals may not add due to rounding. | |||||
15 Mar 2011 : Column 195W
Details of spending commitments on biodiversity conservation in the UK Overseas Territories are provided in the following table. These include commitments under the Darwin Initiative and support for projects to address invasive non-native species, in each of the last five financial years. They also include spend by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee. They do not include spend by others, for example the governments of the Overseas Territories themselves, who are principally responsible for biodiversity conservation in their territories.
|
|
Total (£) |
In addition, DEFRA funded biodiversity conservation projects in 2009 and 2010 in the UK Overseas Territories through the Flagship Species Fund amounting to approximately £10,000 and £28,000 respectively.
Zac Goldsmith:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when her
15 Mar 2011 : Column 196W
Department plans to launch Round 18 of the Darwin Initiative; and whether a proportion of that fund will be reserved for the UK Overseas Territories. [45992]
Richard Benyon: We are aiming to launch Round 18 of the Darwin Initiative shortly. Details of the Round, including the proportion of the fund that may be ear-marked for specific activities or specific geographical areas, are being developed.
Departmental Procurement
Mr Raab: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the cost to the public purse was of the (a) procurement and (b) outsourcing function of (i) her Department and (ii) each (A) agency, (B) non-departmental public body and (C) non-ministerial department for which she is responsible in the last financial year for which figures are available. [43950]
Richard Benyon: The following table shows the identified costs of the (a) procurement and (b) outsourcing functions for the fiscal year 2009-10.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 197W
15 Mar 2011 : Column 198W
Stephen Barclay: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which procurement projects engaged upon by (a) her Department and (b) each non-departmental public body and agency for which she is responsible had a designated senior responsible owner in the latest period for which figures are available; and on what date each officer was appointed in each such case. [45560]
Richard Benyon: The Department, its agencies and non-departmental bodies undertake many projects, many of which may have a procurement requirement. In the core Department, the agencies and non-departmental public bodies, most of these have no central record of all these projects and the related procurements and therefore no central record of all designated senior responsible owners. To compile such a list would incur a disproportionate cost.
Some areas have processes that do allow some collection of data on designated senior responsible owners where the value of the requirement is significant. An example is:
Natural England appointed an SRO for the one procurement project identified over £10 million. The SRO was an executive director and was appointed on 10 March 2009. The contract was awarded on 1 August 2010. Natural England had no other projects over £10 million during the reporting period. Natural England's project management procedures require that a role equivalent to an SRO is appointed for all projects and the seniority of the person fulfilling the role is determined by our financial scheme of delegation.
The Department, its agencies and non-departmental bodies use formal project management techniques and processes to manage most of its projects and the assignment of a senior responsible owner, who may or may not be dedicated to the project, is determined by the estimated value, complexity and delivery requirements of the project. In all cases, projects have designated management to lead all requirements and where procurement is necessary, the skills of professional procurement staff in each of the areas will be sought and used as appropriate.
Forests
Julian Sturdy: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what criteria she proposes to use to determine membership of the Forestry Expert Review Panel. [45755]
Mr Paice: The panel's membership is still being considered. It will include representatives of key environmental and access organisations, alongside representatives of the forestry industry. It will need to draw on a broad range of expertise to inform its work.
Mr Foster: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what process she plans to follow to establish an independent forest advisory panel; and what timetable she has set for this process. [46090]
Mr Paice: The panel’s membership is still being considered. It will include representatives of key environmental and access organisations, alongside representatives of the forestry industry and will need to draw on a broad range of expertise to inform its work. We will make an announcement on the panel’s composition as soon as possible and anticipate that the panel will report its findings in the autumn.
Natural England
Oliver Colvile: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what her Department’s policy is on the use of powers of guidance and direction in sections 15 and 16 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006. [45756]
Richard Benyon: Ministerial powers of guidance and direction in relation to Natural England were included in the Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 in accordance with Cabinet Office guidance.
The Department issued “Statutory guidance for Natural England on regional planning and associated matters”, as required by section 15(1) of the NERC Act in March 2007. Up to the present time, the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the right hon. Member for Meriden (Mrs Spelman), has not considered that either statutory guidance to Natural England under section 15(2), or a direction under section 16, is required.
Oliver Colvile: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs on how many occasions her Department’s and Natural England’s Technical Advice Customers Group has met since 1 January 2008. [45757]
Richard Benyon: In 2006, arrangements were put in place to ensure continued access to the types of technical advice provided to DEFRA (and other Government Departments) by the three predecessor bodies to Natural England, following the vesting of Natural England. The Technical Advice Customers Group was established to review these arrangements, and met a number of times in the early years of Natural England’s operation. It has met twice since 1 January 2008. The last meeting of the group, in 2008, concluded that provision of technical advice was working well and could in future be delivered through existing planning and management channels between DEFRA and Natural England.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 199W
Oliver Colvile: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions (a) Ministers, (b) the Permanent Secretary and (c) the chief scientific adviser to her Department have had with Natural England on the practice of Natural England in (i) assuring the quality of its evidence and advice to her Department and (ii) recording and retaining audit trails of evidence and advice provided to her Department. [45986]
Richard Benyon: There have been no direct discussions recently between Ministers or the Permanent Secretary and Natural England regarding processes for assuring the quality of its evidence and advice to DEFRA, or recording and retaining audit trails of such evidence and advice.
The chief scientific adviser (CSA) has periodic meetings with Natural England's executive director for Science and Evidence. During some recent meetings, quality assuring evidence and advice and audit trails have been discussed. The CSA has also met Natural England's chief executive and officials to discuss similar issues regarding evidence and advice relating to the identification of candidate marine Special Areas of Conservation.
Oliver Colvile: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what guidance her Department has issued to Natural England on (a) good practice in (i) provision of advice and evidence and (ii) measures for the recording of evidence and analysis provided to her Department and (b) the process for designation of marine protected areas. [45987]
Richard Benyon: DEFRA has not issued any specific guidance to Natural England regarding good practice in the provision of evidence and advice or measures for recording evidence and analysis.
There are a number of published guidelines covering various aspects of the use of scientific advice in policy making. The Government chief scientific adviser’s Guidelines on the Use of Scientific and Engineering Advice in Policy Making(1) (updated 2010) are specifically targeted to Government Departments and provide general advice on good practice, including on how scientific and engineering advice should be sought and applied. They do not explicitly apply to non-departmental public bodies such as Natural England. Whether or not there are explicit requirements, the Government would expect Natural England to use good practice, as appropriate to their own purposes and procedures.
Guidance on the designation of European marine sites is provided by the European Commission with additional guidance produced by the Joint Nature Conservation Committee.
DEFRA has issued a guidance note on the proposed approach to the selection and designation of marine conservation zones under part 5 of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009(2). This was issued in draft in May 2009 and finalised in September 2010 following feedback from those using the advice. Guidance has also been provided on identifying possible management measures, ecosystem services and total economic valuation.
(1) http://www.bis.gov.uk/assets/bispartners/goscience/docs/g/10-669-gcsa-guidelines-scientific-engineering-advice-policy-making.pdf
(2) ( )http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/biodiversity/marine/documents/guidance-note1.pdf
15 Mar 2011 : Column 200W
Rivers: Closures
Richard Fuller: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many stretches of river in the East of England were closed by the Environment Agency for maintenance in each of the last three years; and what the length of closure was in each case. [45632]
Richard Benyon: The stretches of Environment Agency navigable rivers in East Anglia that were closed for maintenance over the past three years, and the duration of these closures, are outlined in the following table:
| East Anglian waterways reach closures | |||
|
|
2008-09 | 2009-10 | 2010-11 |
| (1) Closure percentage = total reach days closed/total reach days available percentage | |||
These closures stop navigation within the reach, generally to ensure the safety of the public, staff or contractors while maintenance works are undertaken.
Individual locks are also closed for similar maintenance works. These closures mean that craft cannot navigate through the lock, but can still navigate in the reaches up and downstream of the lock. The locks on the Environment Agency navigable rivers in East Anglia that were closed for maintenance over the past three years, and the duration of these closures, are outlined in the following table:
| East Anglian waterways lock closures | |||
|
|
2008-09 | 2009-10 | 2010-11 |
| (1) Closure percentage = total lock days closed/total lock days available percentage | |||
Seas and Oceans: Environment Protection
Oliver Colvile: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what her Department’s policy is on the (a) openness and (b) transparency of the process for designation of marine protected areas. [45872]
Richard Benyon: We expect a full and open public consultation to take place during the process for designation of marine protected areas. This will be expected to include the reasons for site selection and the evidence on which site selection decisions were made.
Sewers: Private Sector
Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will publish the responses to her Department's consultation on private sewer transfers; and if she will make a statement. [45414]
15 Mar 2011 : Column 201W
Richard Benyon: The Secretary of State for Environment, Foods and Rural Affairs will publish a summary of responses to the consultation in due course. 106 responses were received from 96 respondents covering a wide range of sectors. An analysis of the responses, together with an overview of feedback from the workshops that were undertaken to support the consultation, will be presented in the summary.
Andrew George: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions she has had with Ofwat on the proposed transfer of private sewers to water companies. [45521]
Richard Benyon: DEFRA officials continue to meet regularly with Ofwat to discuss various aspects of the Government's proposals for the transfer of private sewers.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she plans to transfer private sewers to water companies; and if she will make a statement. [46076]
Richard Benyon: The regulations to effect the transfer of private sewers are currently being considered in accordance with the Government's principles for better regulation. Following this they will need parliamentary approval before transfer can take place.
Subject to the regulations being approved, transfer is proposed to take place on 1 October 2011.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she expects the regulations for the transfer of private drains and sewers to come into force. [46315]
Richard Benyon: The regulations to effect the transfer of private sewers are currently being considered in accordance with the Government's principles for better regulation. Following this they will need parliamentary approval before transfer can take place. Subject to the regulations being approved, transfer is proposed to take place on 1 October 2011.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she expects to lay before Parliament the regulations to authorise the transfer of private drains and sewers to statutory sewer companies. [46368]
Richard Benyon: I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave her on 3 March 2011, Official Report, column 517W.
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she plans to publish her proposals for the transfer of private drains and sewers to statutory sewer companies. [46520]
Richard Benyon: The consultation on draft regulations and proposals for schemes for the transfer of private sewers to water and sewerage companies in England and Wales was published on 26 August 2010. With regard to the timing of the proposed regulations, they are currently being considered in accordance with the Government's principles for better regulation. Following this they will need parliamentary approval before transfer can take place. Subject to the regulations being approved, transfer is proposed to take place on 1 October 2011.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 202W
Slaughterhouses
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent research her Department has (a) evaluated and (b) commissioned on levels of pain and distress experienced during the slaughter process by animals (i) not stunned and (ii) stunned prior to slaughter. [45971]
Mr Paice: DEFRA and the New Zealand Ministry of Agriculture and Forestry commissioned and joint funded research to investigate the effects of slaughter by ventral neck incision on the EEG in calves (project number MH0129). This work commenced in January 2005 and the final report was published in the New Zealand Veterinary Journal in April 2009. This work indicates that the neck cut associated with religious slaughter evokes a pain response in anesthetised calves.
DEFRA has commissioned the following projects since the beginning of 2005 which relate to the pain and distress experienced by animals stunned prior to slaughter:
MH0128: Novel and humane gaseous killing methods for pigs;
MH0129: Investigation of the EEG effects-of-slaughter-by ventral-neck incision in calves: humane slaughter study;
MH0135: Containability and aversiveness of different gas mixtures used for the stunning of slaughter weight pigs;
MH0138: Reducing bird stress and discomfort on the poultry shackling line;
MH0145: Study to identify the welfare costs and benefits of existing and novel on-farm culling methods of poultry.
Details of all DEFRA R and D projects can be found by searching for the project code at:
http://randd.defra.gov.uk
DEFRA has not specifically evaluated any research on levels of pain and distress experienced during the slaughter process by animals stunned or not stunned prior to slaughter. However we do seek to ensure policy decisions reflect latest scientific evidence and will consider all relevant published research before final decisions are made. In addition the Farm Animal Welfare Council conducted a review of research when it prepared its reports on red and white meat slaughter in 2003 and 2009 respectively.
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what her policy is on requiring the stunning of animals prior to slaughter. [45972]
Mr Paice: We would prefer to see all animals stunned before slaughter. However, religious slaughter (slaughter without prior stunning) is currently allowed in the UK in recognition of the religious beliefs of Muslim and Jewish faiths. This is consistent with the European directive 93/119/EC which permits an exemption from the requirement to stun animals for methods of slaughter required by certain religious rites.
In the UK slaughter without prior stunning can only be undertaken in a slaughterhouse. Schedule 12 of the Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995 sets out the requirements in more detail, including conditions for restraint, handling, slaughter and minimum bleed-out times.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 203W
Slaughterhouses: Standards
Jack Lopresti: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what steps her Department is taking to promote animal welfare standards in abattoirs. [46323]
Mr Paice: The Government encourage the highest standards of animal welfare at slaughter. Directive 93/119/EC on the protection of animals at the time of slaughter or killing has been implemented by The Welfare of Animals (Slaughter or Killing) Regulations 1995, as amended. These regulations govern animal welfare at slaughter and are designed specifically to prevent cruelty or poor practice in slaughterhouses.
The regulations make it an offence to cause any animal avoidable excitement, pain or suffering at any time between its arrival at a slaughterhouse and when it is killed. In particular, animals must be stunned properly so that they are unconscious and unable to feel pain during the slaughter process unless the slaughter is carried out for meat for a religious purpose.
The regulations also require slaughterers to be licensed. The licensing process involves an assessment of competence by a veterinary surgeon to ensure that slaughterers can carry out their work effectively and competently.
Council Regulation 1099/2009 on the protection of animals at killing was made on 24 September 2009. This regulation will apply from 1 January 2013 and will replace Directive 93/119/EC. The new regulation introduces a number of additional requirements including a requirement that all slaughterhouses (above a minimum size) will have to appoint a specific person responsible for animal welfare and ensure their staff are properly trained and certified. The regulation also permits the use of national rules to maintain existing welfare protection where that is better than the minimum standards set out in the regulation. There will be full consultation on the way regulation 1099/2009 is implemented.
Special Areas of Conservation
Sheryll Murray: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) whether she has any plans to seek independent external expert advice on the (a) processes, (b) evidence, (c) analysis and (d) advice provided by Natural England to inform her Department’s decisions on candidate Special Areas of Conservation; [42162]
(2) whether her Department is assessing the scientific evidence used to inform the decision-making process in relation to any potential or candidate Special Areas of Conservation; and if she will make a statement. [42164]
Richard Benyon:
Decisions to submit candidate Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) to the European Commission are supported by scientific evidence and advice provided by our statutory nature conservation bodies following public consultation. To help inform DEFRA of this process, its chief scientific adviser is commissioning an independent case study review to look at some examples relating to the selection of candidate/possible SACs. The review will consider the following case studies: Lyme Bay and Torbay, and Prawle Point to Plymouth Sound and Eddystone candidate SACs, and Prawle Point to Start Point possible SAC.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 204W
The case study review will look at the evidence, advice and processes, as well as the Government’s evaluation of such information.
Sustainable Development
Mr Bain: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what policy outcomes to enhance sustainable development her Department (a) has developed and (b) plans to develop following the Green Breakfast meeting with ministerial colleagues she hosted on 8 March 2011; and if she will make a statement. [46054]
Richard Benyon: The Green Breakfast meeting is an informal working group, hosted by the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. It considers practical issues related to Government's commitment to deliver sustainable growth. It also operates as a discussion forum for cross cutting issues such as sustainable development, and Ministers from the following Departments are invited to attend: DEFRA, DECC, BIS, UKTI, HMT, Cabinet Office, DFID, FCO, CLG and DfT.
Cabinet Committees remain the place for policy decisions to be made.
Waste Management
Martin Horwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 3 March 2011, Official Report, column 520W, on waste management, which stakeholders (a) Ministers and (b) officials have met in connection with the review of waste policies. [45342]
Richard Benyon [holding answer 10 March 2011]: Ministers have engaged with a wide range of stakeholders through the ongoing review of waste policies, and are continuing to do so as the review progresses. This engagement includes meeting or visiting the following organisations:
Air Products
APS Salads
Asda
Association for Organics Recycling
Biffa
Biogen Greenfinch
British Retail Consortium
Campaign for Real Recycling
Centrol Recycling Group
Coca Cola Enterprises
Envac
Environment Agency
Environmental Services Association
Fareshare
Friends of the Earth
Graphite Resources
Green Alliance
Green-works
Hackney Council
Improvement and Efficiency South East
Ineos Bio
Kilfrost
15 Mar 2011 : Column 205W
Local Government Association
Ocado
Plastics 2020 Challenge consortium
Premier Waste
PYReco
Recresco Ltd
Richmondshire Council
Sita
Somerset waste partnerships
South Tyneside Council
Sustainable Resource Forum
Telford Hart
The Vine Project
Viridor
WRAP
Ministers have met representatives of other organisations in the margins of other events where discussion included the review of waste policies, but it is not possible to compile a complete list of such contact.
Officials from the Department have also met with a wide range of organisations regarding the ongoing review, both through speaking at a significant number of events and meetings with a broad range of stakeholders. This supports the input received to the review of waste policies through other mechanisms. The Department received 309 responses to its Call For Evidence for the review, which included 101 from local authorities, 57 from a wide range of businesses and 53 from private individuals. Copies of the responses to the Call for Evidence will be publicly available in DEFRA’s Information Resource Centre until July 2011. Nearly 400 comments were posted on DEFRA’s online discussion forum by individuals discussing waste policy, with approximately 1,500 individuals completing a short online survey.
Water Charges
Miss McIntosh: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when she plans to publish the consultation on the Walker review of charging and metering for water and sewerage services; and if she will make a statement. [46521]
Richard Benyon: In our programme for government we committed to examine the issues covered by the Walker review. We plan to consult on some of the key points raised this spring.
Water Supply
Caroline Lucas: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs whether she has had discussions with (a) Ofwat and (b) the Department of Energy and Climate Change on the potential for water companies to fund the marginal cost of delivering cold water efficiency measures so that they can be offered for free to householders as part of the Green Deal. [46351]
Richard Benyon: DEFRA has had discussions about the scope for water efficiency measures, both hot and cold, with both Ofwat and the Department of Energy and Climate Change. Advice on water efficiency measures will be offered as part of the overall Green Deal.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 206W
The 'golden rule' of the Green Deal is that expected financial savings from reduced energy use must be equal to or greater than the costs attached to the consumer's energy bill. Because cold water use does not affect a householder's energy use, cold water efficiency measures would not be eligible for Green Deal financing arrangements.
However, water companies can and do offer retrofit cold water efficiency measures. Such services could be delivered alongside Green Deal measures.
Whales
Julian Sturdy: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent steps she has taken in relation to whaling; and if she will make a statement. [45864]
Richard Benyon: I attended the last annual International Whaling Commission (IWC) meeting, to demonstrate our commitment to the work of the IWC and the importance that the UK Government and people attach to it. We worked hard with other member states to ensure that the EU took a strong, pro-conservation position and stood firm to ensure that the IWC moratorium on commercial whaling was not undermined.
Ahead of this year's IWC meeting, I plan to discuss our support for the moratorium on commercial whaling with a range of environmental and other organisations, and with anti-whaling countries.
DEFRA officials will be meeting the 25 EU IWC contracting Governments and other anti-whaling countries in the build-up to the 63rd International Whaling Commission annual meeting (IWC63).
We will also be working with the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to raise the issue with key IWC members prior to IWC63, encouraging support for the moratorium and for the UK's position to ensure the long-term conservation and protection of whales.
Whales: Japan
Mr Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what recent discussions she has had with her Japanese counterpart on whaling. [45508]
Richard Benyon [holding answer 14 March 2011]:The UK Government make their opposition to whaling known to Japan at every appropriate opportunity. The Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, the right hon. Member for Richmond (Yorks) (Mr Hague), and other Ministers, including those from DEFRA, raised whaling with the Japanese Government on several occasions last year. Furthermore, I have written to my Japanese counterpart to express concern over whaling and, in particular, the wide-scale hunting of dolphins. Senior officials also regularly make representations on whaling with the Government of Japan, most recently in January 2011.
The Japanese Government are in no doubt as to the strength of feeling in this country about whaling, and the UK Government will continue to challenge Japan’s position in the build up to this year’s meeting of the International Whaling Commission (IWC63) in July.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 207W
Deputy Prime Minister
Public Reading: Bills
Natascha Engel: To ask the Deputy Prime Minister (1) who will be responsible for operating the dedicated website for public reading stage of Bills; how many people will operate the website; and what budget has been established for the website; [41657]
(2) what progress he has made on the establishment of a dedicated website to take online comments from members of the public on proposed legislation. [41664]
The Deputy Prime Minister: On 15 February 2011, Official Report, column 73WS, I announced the launch of a website that allowed the public to comment on the Protection of Freedoms Bill online, before the House of Commons commenced its consideration at Second Reading:
www.publicreadingstage.cabinetoffice.gov.uk
This is a pilot website and decisions about the operation of any dedicated public reading website will be taken, in light of this experience, by the Leader of the House of Commons in consultation with ministerial colleagues.
Defence
Afghanistan: Peacekeeping Operations
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what new capabilities he expects to be provided to British troops in Afghanistan as a consequence of the funding announced on 10 June 2010 to help troops counter improvised explosive devices. [45787]
Dr Fox: The allocation of up to an additional £67 million announced by the Prime Minister on 10 June 2010 is allowing us to equip a significant increase in the number of specialist counter-improvised explosive device (C-IED) teams in theatre. The additional capabilities include more protected vehicles and more specialist explosive ordnance disposal and search equipment including remote control vehicles, for use by our C-IED teams, and enhancements to our military working dog capability; these, and enhancements to other critical capabilities, will make a considerable contribution to operational capability, increase the protection available to our armed forces, and enhance their ability to defeat the IED threat.
Patrick Mercer: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps his Department (a) has taken and (b) plans to take to encourage the government of Afghanistan to record and report the number of deaths in the conflict in that country in each month. [45809]
Dr Fox: I regularly hold discussions with members of the Afghan Government on a number of issues including fatalities.
United Nations Assistance in Mission Afghanistan in conjunction with the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission currently release bi-annual reports on civilian casualties in Afghanistan and individual ISAF troop contributing nations regularly report fatalities among their own armed forces.
I believe this is an appropriate approach to what is a sensitive and complex issue.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 208W
Patrick Mercer: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) if he will make it his policy to place in the Library at the time of making his quarterly oral statement on Afghanistan monthly estimates of the number of fatalities among ISAF-trained Afghan National Army personnel who were present for duty independently of ISAF troops and his assessment of the extent to which the number of known fatalities reflects actual fatalities; [45810]
(2) if he will present information on (a) the known number and (b) his estimate of the total number of fatalities among ISAF-trained Afghan National Army personnel who were present for duty alongside ISAF troops at the time of each future quarterly oral statement on Afghanistan; [45867]
(3) if he will present information on (a) the known number and (b) his estimate of the total number of fatalities among ISAF-trained Afghan National Army personnel who were present for duty alongside UK troops at the time of each future quarterly oral statement on Afghanistan. [45868]
Dr Fox: This is a matter for the Government of Afghanistan. We do not hold information on the number of Afghan National Security Forces fatalities.
Patrick Mercer: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make it his policy to place in the Library at the time of making his quarterly Oral Statement on Afghanistan cumulative monthly estimates of (a) the number of, (b) the number of fatalities among and (c) the number present for duty (i) alongside ISAF troops, (ii) alongside UK troops and (iii) independent of ISAF troops of ISAF-trained Afghan National Army personnel. [45811]
Dr Fox: I refer my hon. Friend to the answer the Minister for Defence Personnel, Welfare and Veterans, my right hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Robathan) gave on 17 February 2011, Official Report, column 914W.
The Ministry of Defence only holds data on the number of Afghan National Army personnel present for duty within the Task Force Helmand area of operations.
We do not hold information on the number of fatalities in the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF) as it is a matter for the Government of Afghanistan.
The development of the ANSF is a key element in delivering our national security objectives in Afghanistan. Responsibility for the Government’s quarterly oral statement on Afghanistan rotates between the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, the Ministry of Defence and the Department for International Development. Information on the development of the ANSF will continue to be given in the Government’s monthly written statements on Afghanistan, and will be included in quarterly oral statements as appropriate.
Air Force: Military Bases
Sir Menzies Campbell: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 7 March 2011, Official Report, column 802W, on air force: military bases, if he will place in the Library a copy of the study into the UK Military Emergency Diversion Aerodrome capability. [45865]
15 Mar 2011 : Column 209W
Mr Robathan: A copy of the document will be placed in the Library of the House.
Ammunition
Dr Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the shelf life of 120 mm Charm 3 APFSDS L27 rounds. [46047]
Peter Luff: All stocks of the 120 mm Charm 3 APFSDS L27 round are currently held in storage. In these controlled conditions, the L27 round has a five year shelf life.
Dr Huppert: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his Department has assessed the suitability of the use of the L18 charge together with the L27 propellant charge. [46049]
Peter Luff: We are currently assessing whether the L18 charge could be used in conjunction with the L27 round, but we have yet to reach any conclusions.
Armed Forces
Oliver Colvile: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has for restructuring of the armed forces after the date of withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan. [45871]
Dr Fox: The Strategic Defence and Security Review identifies the armed forces we believe we will need over the text 10 years, and the restructuring required to deliver them. It has deliberately focussed on the decisions that need to be taken in the next four years, and left to 2015 those decisions that can better be taken in the light of further experience in Afghanistan and developments in the wider economic situation.
Armed Forces: Allowances
Philip Davies: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 8 February 2011, Official Report, column 126W, on armed forces: pay, how many members of the armed forces have informed their chain of command that they believe they will be placed in financial difficulty by recent changes to their allowances. [41787]
Mr Robathan: The information requested is not held. Service personnel are encouraged to contact their chain of command when they face financial difficulties, whatever the reason for those difficulties. Commanding officers are aware that recent changes to the pay and allowance system may require personnel to make some adjustments to their financial affairs and at least three months’ notice was given to personnel before any measures came into effect to give them the time to do so.
General advice on debt is available to personnel at all levels, and includes written guides, financial expertise of pay staff and service family organisations, as well as ensuring there are good links to national organisations such as the Citizens’ Advice Bureau and Money Advisory Service.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 210W
Armed Forces: Cancer
Mr Donaldson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what research his Department has (a) commissioned and (b) evaluated on the incidence of (i) brain tumours and (ii) other forms of cancer among (A) armed forces personnel and (B) the civilian population. [46604]
Mr Robathan [holding answer 14 March 2011]:The Ministry of Defence’s Defence Analytical Services and Advice (DASA) compare the mortality rates for in-service deaths due to cancer with those in the general UK population in the annual national statistic notice on deaths in the UK regular armed forces.
In addition, DASA provide the numbers of deaths due to cancers among veterans of the first Gulf war in the annual national statistic notice on the mortality of veterans of the first Gulf war. Overall figures and breakdowns by cancer site are provided. Mortality rates are compared to those in a comparison ‘Era’ cohort, consisting of individuals of a similar age, gender, service, regular/reservist status and rank who were in service on 1 January 1991 but did not deploy to the Gulf. The report does not currently compare cancers to the UK population.
The National Statistics on deaths in the UK regular armed forces and Gulf mortality are available on the DASA website
www.dasa.mod.uk
and the next release is due on 31 March 2011.
From April 2011, DASA will start a study to monitor mortality and cancer registrations of all UK personnel in service (including all reservists who deploy on operations) from 18 January 2003 until the draw down of troops in Afghanistan. The intention is to monitor the population for their lifetime and it will include the veteran population.
Armed Forces: Housing
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his policy is on the use of receipts from the sale of barracks for improvements to service accommodation. [45758]
Mr Robathan: In line with HM Treasury guidance, receipts retained by the Ministry of Defence from the sale of property are reinvested by the Department in key priorities, and form part of the Defence budget. In support of our servicemen and women more capital is generally invested each year in modernising the Defence estate than is generated by the sale of estate assets.
Armed Forces: Redundancy
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the number of redundancies to arise from proposed changes to communications and logistics support to Headquarters Allied Rapid Reaction Corps; and whether this figure has been reckoned as the addition to or part of the 25,000 civilian staff redundancies already announced. [46286]
15 Mar 2011 : Column 211W
Mr Robathan: The strategic defence and security review white paper published in October 2010 outlined the requirement to restructure the Army and stated that the Army will
‘rationalise our deployable headquarters by reducing the communications and logistics support to Headquarters Allied Rapid Reaction Corps (ARRC) to reflect its static rather than mobile role’.
While organisational restructuring and reductions in military manpower are clearly linked it is incorrect to assume that because an organisation is rationalised the individuals in that organisation will be made redundant. When organisational change reduces the requirement for officers or soldiers, then the overall strength is reduced. Separate processes are used to determine how to effect that reduction and, therefore, which individuals will be affected. This means that the most appropriate individuals leave the service, not necessarily the ones who happen to be in an organisation at the time it is rationalised.
It is too early to say whether this restructuring will result in a surplus of civilian staff, but in the event of civilian staff redundancies resulting from this restructuring they will be scored as part of the 25,000 already announced.
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the oral answer of 15 February 2011, Official Report, column 815, on the armed forces (redundancies), what criteria his Department used to determine which warrant officers were to have their contracts terminated. [46656]
Mr Robathan: The Army’s versatile engagement long career and long service list is being reviewed against future requirements for such posts. As a result, those individuals on the list whose current contract was due to end between 31 March 2011 and 12 January 2012 were notified that they may not receive further extension of service once their current contract period ends. This is an interim planning measure until the completion of the review, which will confirm the numbers and skills required for the future.
These individuals are on individual contracts and are not being made redundant as part of the strategic defence and security review reductions to the armed forces.
Armoured Fighting Vehicles
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much funding he plans to allocate to introducing the Future Rapid Effects System Utility Vehicle. [45900]
Peter Luff: The Utility Vehicle (UV) programme has not yet reached its main investment decision point. The Ministry of Defence does not publish the planned costs of programmes before this point. To do otherwise would potentially undermine our commercial position.
Arms Trade
Tessa Munt: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps his Department takes to (a) record and (b) monitor the subsequent use of arms systems and other weapons sold to foreign governments by UK companies. [46202]
15 Mar 2011 : Column 212W
Mr Gerald Howarth: The UK maintains a rigorous and transparent arms export control system, under which all export licence applications are assessed case by case against the Consolidated European Union and National Arms Exports Licensing Criteria.
UK end-use monitoring of UK-origin military goods takes place in three contexts. Firstly, information gathering takes place in making the case-by-case assessment of each licence application. This takes account of the past record of the proposed end-user. Secondly, there is detailed monitoring, review and reporting around incidents of concern, the results of which are factored into judgments about whether or not to revoke extant licences and issue new ones. Thirdly, there is general monitoring on a continuous basis, with information received in-country being fed back to the export licensing and other relevant Departments in London. Foreign and Commonwealth Office posts abroad play an active and vital role in monitoring.
Army: Redundancy
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what criteria his Department plans to use to determine which army personnel will be made redundant under its present programme of redundancies. [46460]
Mr Robathan: I refer the right hon. Member to the statement given by the Secretary of State for Defence, my right hon. Friend the Member for North Somerset (Dr Fox), on 1 March 2011, Official Report, columns 21-22WS, on the armed forces redundancy programme.
The Army will be in a position to confirm the criteria by which Army personnel will be made redundant under its present programme of redundancies on 4 April 2011.
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether he anticipates redundancies from the conversion of the second operational divisional headquarters to a force preparation role. [46471]
Mr Robathan: The strategic defence and security review White Paper published in October 2010 outlined the requirement to restructure the Army and stated that the Army will
‘convert the second of our operational divisional headquarters to a force preparation role.’
While organisational restructuring and reductions in military manpower are clearly linked it is incorrect to assume that because an organisation is rationalised the individuals in that organisation will be made redundant. When organisational change reduces the requirement for officers or soldiers, then the overall strength is reduced. Separate processes are used to determine how to effect that reduction and, therefore, which individuals will be affected. This means that the most appropriate individuals leave the service, not necessarily the ones who happen to be in an organisation at the time it is rationalised.
It is too early to say whether this restructuring will result in a surplus of civilian staff, but in the event of civilian staff redundancies resulting from this restructuring they will be scored as part of the 25,000 already announced.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 213W
Defence: Expenditure
Oliver Colvile: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what steps his Department is taking to monitor the reduction of expenditure in the defence budget. [45878]
Dr Fox: Successful implementation of the Strategic Defence and Security Review is one of the Ministry of Defence’s key objectives and encompasses reductions in expenditure. I have, therefore, set up a monthly steering group chaired by myself to monitor and drive forward the process. This is supported by a Defence Operating Board (Transforming Defence) chaired by the 2(nd) permanent under-secretary and vice-chief of the defence staff. These will enable us to provide assurance of delivery and senior oversight to maintain momentum.
Defence: Procurement
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) how much he expects his Department to save as a result of the commitment in the Strategic Defence and Security Review to save significant amounts from contract re-negotiations with the defence industry in each year of the comprehensive spending review period; [45748]
(2) what recent discussions (a) he, (b) Ministers in his Department and (c) officials in his Department have had with representatives of the defence industry on the honouring of provisions in contracts to which his Department is party; [45989]
(3) what estimate he has made of the saving for his Department as a result of implementation of the commitment in the Strategic Defence and Spending Review to save significant amounts from contract renegotiations with the defence industry; and how much he expects to be saved in each year of the comprehensive spending review period; [46464]
(4) whether the contract renegotiations with the defence industry committed to in the Strategic Defence and Security Review have commenced; and if he will make a statement. [46469]
Peter Luff: The Ministry of Defence honours its contractual commitments. Where it is necessary to amend the conditions of a contract, we do so through negotiation. Regarding negotiations relating specifically to post-Strategic Defence and Security Review work, I refer the right hon. Member to the answer I gave on 2 March 2011, Official Report, columns 454-5W to the right hon. Member for Coventry North East (Mr Ainsworth).
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many obligations in contracts with private sector providers have not been met as a consequence of the time taken to announce the composition of the equipment programme following the strategic defence and security review. [46026]
Peter Luff: I am aware of no contractual obligations in respect of defence equipment which the Department has not met as a result of the current financial planning round.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 214W
Departmental Leaseback Arrangements
Stewart Hosie: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what assets his Department has sold and leased back over the last 12 months; what the sale price was of each asset so sold; and what estimate he has made of the cost to the public purse of leasing back each such asset over the period of the lease. [45074]
Mr Robathan: The Ministry of Defence has not sold and leased back any assets during the last 12 months.
Departmental Procurement
Stephen Barclay: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many procurement projects with a monetary value greater than (a) £10 million, (b) £50 million and (c) £100 million (i) his Department and (ii) each non-departmental public body and agency for which he is responsible was engaged upon in the latest period for which figures are available. [45555]
Peter Luff: The current numbers of procurement projects identified by the Ministry of Defence in the categories requested is shown in the following table:
| Project value (£ million) | Number of projects |
The projects included are those funded and managed by the Defence Equipment and Support and Defence Estates organisations. There are no procurement projects being managed by the non-departmental public bodies that fall within the scope of the question.
Departmental Public Expenditure
John Glen: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what timetable he has set for decisions on measures to achieve non-frontline savings identified in the Strategic Defence and Security Review. [46373]
Dr Fox: The Ministry of Defence is committed to making at least £4.3 billion of non-frontline savings by 2014-15. We are determined to deliver these.
Departmental Research
Mr Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much expenditure his Department (a) allocated to science and technology research in each of the last five years and (b) plans to allocate to science and technology research in each of the next five years. [45928]
Peter Luff [holding answer 14 March 2011]: The most recently published figures for net Ministry of Defence (MOD) research spending in “UK Defence Statistics 2010”, which included the research programme controlled by the chief scientific adviser (CSA) and other activity reported as “research” in the accounts across MOD are (inclusive of non-recoverable VAT at current prices):
15 Mar 2011 : Column 215W
|
|
£ million |
MOD research expenditure statistics are designated National Statistics status and as such the release of the figure for 2009-10 and 2010-11 are embargoed until their publication by the Office for National Statistics in September 2011 and 2012, respectively. However, the organisation within the MOD charged with management and procurement of research for CSA, the largest part of the reported expenditure, recorded a net resource outturn of some £466 million for 2009-10 and was allocated a budget of £439 million for 2010-11.
No final decisions have been taken in the current defence planning round (PR11) on the level of research funding for 2011-12 onwards. However, we expect the science and technology budget to rise slightly in cash terms over the comprehensive spending review period. A complete time series detailing MOD research expenditure is published in UK Defence Statistics (Table 1.8), a copy of which is available in the Library of the House.
Departmental Security
Jon Trickett: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for what reasons persons not employed by Government departments or agencies are issued with passes entitling them to enter his Department's premises. [43215]
Mr Robathan: Passes may be issued to individuals who have valid business reasons for making frequent visits to specific Government sites (e.g. contractors), subject to the usual security checks.
European Fighter Aircraft
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will assess the effect on arrangements for the defence of the (a) UK and (b) Falkland Islands from aerial attack of circumstances where Typhoon aircraft are stationed in an air-to-air role outside that airspace. [44996]
Nick Harvey: The Typhoon force is of sufficient size that it could support a contingency operation overseas, while at the same time maintaining aircraft at continuous ground readiness to fulfil all Quick Reaction Alert standing commitments at RAF Coningsby, RAF Leuchars and in the Falklands.
Angus Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will estimate the (a) cost to date and (b) future cost of compatibility tests for each type of ground attack weapon deployed from Typhoon aircraft. [44997]
Peter Luff: The ground attack weapons currently cleared for use on Typhoon aircraft are Enhanced Paveway II using the Litening III Laser Designation Pod, Paveway II, Unguided 10001b Bomb and the Mauser gun. It is estimated that the total cost of the compatibility tests for these weapons was £4.6 million.
15 Mar 2011 : Column 216W
The Paveway IV bomb, which will also use the Litening III Laser Designation Pod, is currently being cleared for future use on Typhoon aircraft. This weapon is being integrated under the Typhoon Future Capability Programme. It is estimated that the total cost of the compatibility tests for this weapon will be £2.4 million.
The cost of individual tests is not recorded.
Gurkhas: Ex-servicemen
Mr Buckland: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what the terms of reference are of the cross-Government task force on Gurkha veterans and their families; and whether the task force is to examine (a) pensions and (b) other welfare payments to Gurkha veterans; [46199]
(2) what the date was of the most recent meeting of the cross-Government task force on Gurkha veterans; and on what date the next meeting of the task force is scheduled; [46200]
(3) which Government departments participate in the cross-Government task force on Gurkha veterans and their families; [46201]
(4) whether organisations representing Gurkha veterans have been consulted by the cross-Government task force on issues affecting Gurkha veterans and their families. [46714]
Mr Robathan: The aim of the Cross Government Working Group, which was convened following the immigration changes in 2009, was to ensure that ex-Gurkhas in Nepal were able to make an informed decision to come to the UK and if they did so, that there was an end-to-end process to make their settlement as smooth as possible. The Working Group consisted of the Ministry of Defence (MOD), the UK Border Agency, the Department for Work and Pensions, the Department for Communities and Local Government, the Department of Health, the Department for Children, Schools and Families, the Cabinet Office, the Foreign Office and Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs. The issues of pension and welfare payments were not examined by the Working Group. All ex-Gurkhas who settle in the UK are entitled to apply for the full range of state benefits, if they are unable to work. There are no plans to review this. The Working Group met three times, most recently on 16 February 2010, although most business on the key issues has been and continues to be conducted bilaterally between Government Departments.
The Cross Government Working Group is being reconvened with a new aim of looking beyond the issue of the settlement process. It will consider what options are available for specific communities who are experiencing strains due to large numbers of ex-Gurkhas and their families who have settled in these areas.
The MOD provided extensive briefing in 2009 and 2010 for both service charities and ex-Gurkha organisations, in the UK and Nepal, on the work of the Cross Government Working Group.
Improvised Explosive Devices
Mr Jim Murphy: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much funding he has allocated to counter-improvised explosive device capability in each financial year from 2011-12 to 2014-15. [45806]
15 Mar 2011 : Column 217W
Dr Fox: A significant proportion of our Counter-Improvised Explosive Device (C-IED) capability procured to date has been as a result of Urgent Operational Requirements (UOR) and therefore funded by the Reserve. As specific enhancements in this area are dependent on the evolving threat, future expenditure cannot be predicted with any accuracy. Countering IEDs encompasses a multitude of capabilities and responsibilities spread throughout the Department and hence there is no one central area that holds this information. In relation to Defence funded capabilities, we do not release information for projects that have not reached the main investment decision.
Libya
Robert Halfon: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether his Department has (a) had any discussions with and (b) provided any assistance to British universities in securing (i) contracts and (ii) financial support from Libya in the last 10 years. [46071]
Dr Fox: Since the appointment of the coalition Government the Ministry of Defence has had no discussions with, or provided any assistance to, British universities interested in trading with Libya.
Marines
Mr Ainsworth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what recent assessment he has made of the likely effect of the implementation of the measures in the Strategic Defence and Security Review on the (a) size, (b) capability and (c) deployability of the Royal Marines; and if he will make a statement. [46019]
Nick Harvey [holding answer 14 March 2011]: I refer the right hon. Member to the answer given by my hon. Friend, the Minister for Defence Equipment, Support and Technology (Peter Luff) on 21 January 2011, Official Report, column 1022W.