Mr Lammy: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many young adult offenders aged 18 to 20 years old from the (a) London Borough of Barnet, (b) London Borough of Bexley, (c) London Borough of Bromley, (d) London Borough of Croydon, (e) London Borough of Hillingdon, (f) Royal Borough of Kingston-upon-Thames and (g) London borough of Sutton were held in (i) young offender institutions, (ii) local prisons, (iii) women's prisons and (iv) other parts of the secure estate in each month since May 2009. [106207]
Mr Blunt: All young offenders serving sentences of detention in a young offenders institution are held in appropriately designated young offender institution (YOI) accommodation within the prison estate. The majority of this accommodation is in dedicated YOIs, although some establishments in the estate have a dual designation (designated both as a prison and a YOI) and hold both adult prisoners and young offenders.
The following tables show the number of offenders aged 18-20 years old with a recorded residential address or proxy in the London boroughs of Barnet, Bexley, Bromley, Croydon, Hillingdon, Kingston-upon-Thames and Sutton who were held in predominant function male young offender institutions, predominant function male local prisons, predominant function female prisons and other prisons on a set day in each month where data are available since May 2009. The data have only been recorded centrally since May 2009 and from September 2010 are available on a bi-monthly basis.
These figures have been drawn from administrative IT systems, which, as with any large scale recording system, are subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Information on offenders' residences is provided by offenders on reception into prison and recorded on a central IT system. Addresses can include a home address, an address to which offenders intend to return on discharge or next of kin address and these figures are provided in the following table.
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |||||||||
| Origin local authority | Prison f unction | May | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar | May | Jul | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar |
1 May 2012 : Column 1499W
1 May 2012 : Column 1500W
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |||||||||
| Origin local authority | Prison function | May | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar | May | Jul | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar |
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |||||||||
| Origin local authority | Prison function | May | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar | May | Jul | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar |
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |||||||||
| Origin local authority | Prison function | May | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar | May | Jul | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar |
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |||||||||
| Origin local authority | Prison function | May | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar | May | Jul | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar |
1 May 2012 : Column 1501W
1 May 2012 : Column 1502W
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |||||||||
| Origin local authority | Prison function | May | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar | May | Jul | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar |
| 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |||||||||
| Origin local authority | Prison function | May | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar | May | Jul | Sep | Nov | Jan | Mar |
Energy and Climate Change
Animals
Simon Danczuk: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what animals are allowed on his Department's premises. [103838]
Gregory Barker [holding answer 19 April 2012]:To date, in common with many other Departments, the Department of Energy and Climate Change has not had a formal policy on this matter.
Carbon Emissions
Mr Raab: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how many Certified Emissions Reduction credits were purchased by the Government under the Clean Development Mechanism in each year from 2005 to 2012 to date; and what the cost was of purchasing those credits in each year. [106177]
Gregory Barker [holding answer 30 April 2012]:At the auction for the Government Carbon Offsetting Facility (GCOF) Phase 1 the total number of Certified Emissions Reduction (CER) credits purchased was 305,000 at a cost of £3,022,550. This covers the period April 2006 to March 2009.
The first auction for GCOF Phase 2 commenced in March 2010 and to date the number of credits for each year is:
2010 Total credits = 141,558 @ total cost = £1,816,739
2011 Total credits = 153,379 @ total cost £1,304,463
This information is available on the DECC website:
http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/emissions/co2_offsetting/gov_offsetting/gov_data/gov_data.aspx
The results of the seventh auction, included in the figures above, will be published shortly.
Mr Raab: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change how much commission was paid by the Government when purchasing Certified Emissions Reduction credits under the Clean Development Mechanism in each year from 2005 to 2012 to date; and to which companies this commission was paid. [106178]
Gregory Barker [holding answer 30 April 2012]:The Government do not pay commissions to suppliers when purchasing Certified Emissions Reduction credits under the Clean Development Mechanism. Individual Government Departments taking part in an e-auction pay the winning supplier only for the cost of the carbon they offset.
Mr Raab: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change from which Clean Development Mechanism projects the Certified Emissions Reduction credits purchased by the Government originated in each year from 2005 to 2012 to date. [106180]
Gregory Barker [holding answer 30 April 2012]: Details of the projects covered by Government Carbon Offsetting Facility Phase 1 and Phase 2 (GCOF1 and 2) can be found on DECC's website at:
http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/emissions/co2_offsetting/gov_offsetting/gov_projects/gov_projects.aspx
For convenience they are shown as follows. All projects originate in China, India or Brazil.
1 May 2012 : Column 1503W
The latest project 7 in March 2012 had to be conducted as two separate auctions and so we have two winners:
South Pole Carbon Asset Management Ltd—Renewable wind, location India
RWE Supply and Trading Switzerland- Renewable wind, China
Project 6—won by RWE Supply and Trading Switzerland S.A—Hebei Chengde Songshan Wind Farm Project—CDM type: Wind Farm Project—Location: China
Project 5—won by First Climate Markets AG—Cruz Alta Bagasse Cogeneration Project—CDM type: Bagasse-based cogeneration connected to an electricity grid—Location: Brazil
Project 4—won by RWE Supply and Trading Switzerland S.A—Hebei Shangyi Manjing East Wind Farm Project—CDM type: Wind—renewable energy—Location: China
Project 3—won by EDF Trading (for spot purchase) and Essent Trading International S.A. (for forward purchase)—Inner Mongolia Wudaogou 50.25MW Wind Power Project—CDM type: Wind—renewable energy—Location: China
Project 2—won by First Climate Markets AG—KMS Power 6MW Renewable Sources Biomass Power Project—CDM type: Biomass—Renewable energy—Location: India
Project 1—won by Essent Trading International SA—Hebei Shangyi Manjing East Wind Farm Project—CDM type: Wind—Renewable energy—Location: China
The Horizonte wind generation project—CDM type: Wind—Renewable energy, Location: Brazil
Cucau bagasse cogeneration project, CDM type: Biomass—Renewable energy, Location: Brazil
Sri Balaji 6MW non-conventional renewable sources biomass power project—CDM type: Biomass—Renewable energy, Location: India
Gayatri agro industrial power—CDM type: Biomass—Renewable energy, Location: India
Sri Indra Power Energies—CDM type: Biomass—Renewable energy, Location: India
Gansu Zhouqu Shimenping 15MW hydropower station project—CDM type: Small hydro power—Renewable energy, Location: China
Pesqueiro Energia small hydroelectric project—CDM type: Small hydro power—Renewable energy, Location: Brazil
CAMIL Itaqui biomass electricity generation project—CDM type: Biomass—Renewable energy Location: Brazil
Perpetual 7.5MW non-conventional renewable sources biomass power project—CDM Type: Biomass—Renewable energy, Location: India
Shalivahana non-conventional renewable sources biomass power project—CDM type: Biomass—Renewable energy, Location: India
KMS power 6MW renewable sources biomass power project—CDM type: Biomass—Renewable Energy, Location: India
Electricity Generation
Alun Cairns: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change whether he plans to introduce capacity payments for non-nuclear electricity generating plants. [106297]
Charles Hendry: The Government intends to design and legislate for a capacity market to ensure security of supply. It is expected that all providers of reliable capacity will be able to participate in the capacity market, potentially subject to some limitations on low carbon plants.
More information on the developing design of the capacity market will be published later in the spring.
1 May 2012 : Column 1504W
Energy: Conservation
Caroline Flint: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what plans he has for innovation funding for the application of pre-commercial technologies which can achieve significant energy savings in existing non-domestic buildings; and if he will make a statement. [105628]
Gregory Barker: On 8 March 2012, DECC announced the allocation of up to £10 million to support retrofit applications which can improve the energy efficiency of existing non domestic buildings. DECC will partner with the Technology Strategy Board (TSB) to launch this competition known as ‘Invest in Innovative Refurb'. The three year scheme launched on 30 April 2012.
The funding will be made available in two tranches. The first tranche of the competition opens on 30 April 2012 and applicants must register their interest by 6 June 2012. Applications must be submitted by 13 June 2012. The second tranche will open in mid October.
Environment Protection
Caroline Flint: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change pursuant to the answer of 19 April 2012, Official Report, column 484W, on environmental protection, how much of the £20 million allocated to marine energy array demonstration projects has been (a) allocated to projects and (b) spent. [105618]
Gregory Barker: The Marine Energy Array Demonstrator (MEAD) scheme was launched on 5 April 2012 and the deadline for applications is the 1 June 2012. A two stage assessment and selection process will follow with final award of grants expected in late 2012/early 2013.
To date, no grant funds have been committed to specific projects nor has any of the grant been spent.
Caroline Flint: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change pursuant to the answer of 19 April 2012, Official Report, column 484W, on environmental protection, how much of the £15 million allocated to the offshore wind accelerator project has been (a) allocated to projects and (b) spent. [105619]
Gregory Barker: The offshore wind accelerator (OWA) is being delivered by the Carbon Trust who have been allocated the entire budget under a grant agreement. The Carbon Trust have informed us in their quarterly report that the DECC spend on the offshore wind accelerator to date is £3,150,000.
Caroline Flint: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change pursuant to the answer of 19 April 2012, Official Report, column 484W, on environment protection, how much of the £15 million allocated to offshore wind innovative components has been (a) allocated to projects and (b) spent. [105620]
Gregory Barker:
The first call for proposals for the offshore wind component technologies development and Demonstration scheme closed in December 2011
1 May 2012 : Column 1505W
and resulted in grant awards to four companies with a fifth in the final stages of negotiation. The total allocated to date is approximately £4 million.
The total cash spend as of 31 March 2012 is £310,000.
Caroline Flint: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change pursuant to the answer of 19 April 2012, Official Report, column 484W, on environment protection, how much of the £15 million allocated to the Bioenergy Fund has been (a) allocated to projects and (b) spent. [105621]
Gregory Barker: Of the £15 million allocated to Bioenergy, approximately £7 million has been allocated to projects with the Carbon Trust. In the Carbon Trust business plan for delivery of DECC-funded Innovation activity dated March 2012, they indicate that they have spent approximately £3 million.
The remaining funding has been allocated to projects which will be announced this summer.
Caroline Flint: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change pursuant to the answer of 19 April 2012, Official Report, column 484W, on environment protection, how much of the £35 million allocated to buildings energy efficiency projects has been (a) allocated to projects and (b) spent. [105623]
Gregory Barker: A total of £35.8 million has been allocated by the Department of Energy and Climate Change to buildings energy efficiency projects. This comprises £2.8 million for a demonstration scheme to test the performance of heat pumps integrated with thermal storage, which incurred full spend of the total £2.8 million in FY 2011-12.
The other buildings schemes where spend has been allocated but are due to be launched from the end of April/May 2012 are:
Up to £10 million to support innovative technologies and processes to save energy in existing non domestic buildings;
£20 million of the £35 million Energy Entrepreneur's Fund, which seeks to support innovation in SMEs and stimulate private sector investment in energy saving technologies for buildings;
Up to £3 million for an advanced thermal storage competition which aims to assess the performance of compact storage for use with heating technologies in the domestic sector.
Caroline Flint: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change pursuant to the answer of 19 April 2012, Official Report, column 484W, on environment protection, how much of the £180 million allocated to support schemes for low-carbon technologies has been spent. [105624]
Gregory Barker: The innovation spending by DECC in financial year ended 31 March 2012 was £29 million. This comprised the new theme areas announced plus some legacy innovation projects.
Gas and Electricity Markets Authority
Caroline Flint:
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change pursuant to the written answer of 23 April 2012, Official Report, column 618W,
1 May 2012 : Column 1506W
on Ofgem, what the largest amount paid to an individual member of staff as a bonus was in
(a)
2010 and
(b)
2011. [106032]
Charles Hendry [holding answer 30 April 2012]:The bonus payments of the most senior members of Ofgem are published each year by Ofgem. In 2010, the largest bonus payment made to a member of staff was £41,000, following agreement with the Cabinet Office in 2007. In 2011, it was £15,000.
Heating: Radioactive Materials
Paul Flynn: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what information he has received from the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority on plans to ship radioactively contaminated heat exchangers from Magnox nuclear plant to Studsvik Nuclear AB at Nykoping in Sweden for treatment. [106259]
Charles Hendry: The Office for Nuclear Regulation informed the Department of the plan to transport them to Sweden. The plans to ship these heat exchangers were fully approved by the relevant regulators.
Meters
John Robertson: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change what recent discussions his Department has had with Ofgem on raising the debt level threshold which must be met by prepaid meter customers to switch supplier. [106395]
Charles Hendry: DECC Ministers and officials meet with Ofgem on a regular basis to discuss market issues.
Ofgem is responsible for regulating gas and electricity supply, including the rules governing the use of prepayment meters. The debt assignment protocol helps prepayment meter customers with a debt less or equal to £200 to switch providing the new supplier agrees to take on the debt. Ofgem monitors the protocol's effectiveness by recording the number of customers blocked from switching as a result of debt. It is for Ofgem to decide whether any further action is required.
Wind Power
Mark Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change if he will increase the minimum distance that wind turbines must be sited from dwellings. [101365]
Robert Neill: I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Department for Communities and Local Government.
I refer my hon. Friend to the answer I gave today.
Education
Academies
Ian Mearns: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what proportion of converter academies have (a) formal and (b) other arrangements to help another school raise its performance. [104827]
Mr Gibb:
It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
1 May 2012 : Column 1507W
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what proportion of primary schools in (a) Witham constituency and (b) Essex have converted to academy status in the last 12 months. [105207]
(a) none of the 32 primary schools in Witham have converted to academy status since April 2011.
(b) in Essex, 29 of 459 primary schools have converted to academy status since April 2011, which is 6% of all state maintained primary schools in Essex.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what proportion of secondary schools in (a) Witham constituency and (b) Essex have converted to academy status in the last 12 months. [105208]
(a) in Witham, three of five secondary schools have converted to academy status since April 2011, which is 60% of state maintained secondary schools within the constituency.
(b) in Essex, 41 of 76 secondary schools have converted to academy status since April 2011, which is 54% of all state maintained primary schools within Essex.
Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what advice and guidance his Department provides to primary school governing bodies who are considering academy status. [105209]
Mr Gibb: Full details on the steps to becoming an academy are available on the DFE website at:
http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/leadership/typesofschools/academies
When a school registers an interest to convert—a DFE official will contact the school and will guide and support them throughout the conversion process.
Academies: Press Releases
Lisa Nandy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education if he will instruct officials in his Department
1 May 2012 : Column 1508W
not to require supportive quotes from academies for use in press releases. [106399]
Mr Gibb: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Academies: Sponsorship
Austin Mitchell: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many academies there were on the latest date for which figures are available; how many of those were sponsored by a private donor; and how much has been donated to each sponsored academy. [105374]
Mr Gibb: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Adoption: Sussex
Nicholas Soames: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many children in (a) Mid Sussex constituency and (b) West Sussex were in foster care awaiting adoption in each of the last five years. [105379]
Tim Loughton [holding answer 25 April 2012]: The information requested for West Sussex local authority can be found in the tables. Information at constituency level is not available.
The decision that a looked-after child should be placed for adoption is made by the local authority but the local authority cannot actually place the child with prospective adopters without either a placement order or parental consent (depending on the individual circumstances of the case).
Information about the decision that a child should be placed for adoption has only been collected for all looked after children, for whom the decision was made, since 2009. Previously, this information was only given when the child had been adopted.
Consequently, the number of children waiting for adoption can only be provided for the last three years.
| Looked after children for whom the decision was made that they should be placed for adoption while placed in foster care, who were then placed for adoption, adopted, had the decision that they should be placed for adoption reversed or who were still waiting to be adopted at 31 March (1,2,3,4) , years ending 31 March 2009 to 2011, coverage: West Sussex | |||||
| Number | |||||
| Year in which the child was placed for adoption, adopted, for whom the decisi on was reversed or was waiting t o be adopted | |||||
| 2009 | |||||
| Year in which the decision was made that the child should be placed for adoption | Number of children in foster care for whom the decision was made that they should be placed for adoption | Number of children placed for adoption (5) | Number of children adopted | Number for whom the decision was reversed | Number at 31 March awaiting adoption (6) |
1 May 2012 : Column 1509W
1 May 2012 : Column 1510W
| Number | |||||
| Year in which the child was placed for adoption, adopted, for whom the decisi on was reversed or was waiting t o be adopted | |||||
| 2010 | |||||
| Year in which the decision was made that the child should be placed for adoption | Number of children in foster care for whom the decision was made that they should be placed for adoption | Number of children placed for adoption (5) | Number of children adopted | Number for whom the decision was reversed | Number at 31 March awaiting adoption (6) |
| Number | |||||
| Year in which the child was placed for adoption, adopted, for whom the decisi on was reversed or was waiting t o be adopted | |||||
| 2011 | |||||
| Year in which the decision was made that the child should be placed for adoption | Number of children in foster care for whom the decision was made that they should be placed for adoption | Number of children placed for adoption (5) | Number of children adopted | Number for whom the decision was reversed | Number at 31 March awaiting adoption (6) |
| * = Figures not shown in order to protect confidentiality. n/a = Not applicable. (1) Numbers have been rounded to the nearest 5. Consequently, the figures may not add up. For confidentiality purposes, numbers from one to five inclusive have been replaced by an asterisk (*). Where any number is shown as zero (0), the original figure submitted was zero (0). (2) Only children looked after in a foster care placement when the decision was made that they should be placed for adoption have been counted. (3) For children living with the family intending to adopt them (i.e. placed for adoption), it is for the prospective adopters to apply to court for an adoption order. (4) Children waiting to be placed for adoption may either be waiting for a placement order to be made by the court or be in the process of being matched with prospective adopters. (5) The number of children placed for adoption during the year may include some children who were also adopted that year. (6) The number of children at 31 March awaiting adoption is calculated as the total number of children in foster care for whom the decision was made that they should be placed for adoption, minus the total number of children who were adopted, for whom the decision was reversed. The number includes children who have been placed for adoption, but for whom an adoption order has not yet been made, as well as children who have not yet been placed. Source: SSDA 303 | |||||
Information on adopted children can be found in the Statistical First Release ‘Children Looked After by Local Authorities in England (including adoption and care leavers)—year ending 31 March 2011’, which is available on the Department’s website via the following link:
http://www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/DB/SFR/s001026/index.shtml
Building Schools for the Future Programme
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether (a) he or (b) his special advisers (i) sent or (ii) received emails relating to the Building Schools for the Future programme through their private email accounts. [93243]
Tim Loughton: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Children in Care
Mark Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what support he plans to put in place for the parents of at-risk children to reduce the number of care applications. [103867]
Tim Loughton: The Government are committed to improving the support to families with vulnerable children. In particular we have freed local authorities to focus on essential frontline services, and to invest in early intervention and prevention in order to produce better results for children, young people and families. This includes the development of Sure Start Children's Centres, accessible to all families with young children, but focused on those in greatest need.
The Department for Education is also supporting and part funding the Government's Troubled Families programme, which aims to transform the lives of the country's 120,000 most troubled families. These will include families with children on the edge of care.
The Early Intervention Grant provides a substantial funding stream—worth more than £2.2 billion per annum—to support local authorities. EIG brings together funding for early intervention and preventative services for the most disadvantaged in society; for example Sure Start Children's Centres, support for families with multiple problems and targeted support for young people.
The Department for Education is also currently funding a number of multi-systemic interventions for children on the edge of care or custody and their families. These
1 May 2012 : Column 1511W
include multi-systemic therapy (MST) for young people living at home and their families where there may be antisocial behaviour and offending, substance misuse and mental health problems in parents and/or children and/or domestic violence.
Children: Speech Therapy
Sir Bob Russell: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what recent discussions he has had with Ministers in the Department of Health on reductions in funding for speech therapy for children; and if he will make a statement. [105238]
Tim Loughton: The Secretary of State for Education, the right hon. Member for Surrey Heath (Michael Gove), has not had any recent discussions with Ministers in the Department of Health regarding reductions in funding for speech therapy for children.
Computers
Rachel Reeves: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many computers and related equipment have been purchased by his Department and its public bodies since May 2010; and what the (a) makes and (b) costs were. [105835]
Tim Loughton: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Computers
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether (a) he or (b) his special advisers use any non-departmental issued computers or tablets for official business; and what steps he is taking to ensure that data stored on any such devices can be searched in response to requests under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. [93238]
Tim Loughton: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether any (a) Ministers, (b) officials and (c) special advisers in his Department have been disciplined for using private email accounts to discuss government business since May 2010; and if he will make a statement. [90467]
Tim Loughton [holding answer 18 January 2012]: The Department is aware of two instances in which one official and one contractor used private accounts in contravention of the guidance provided to them for the work that they were undertaking. The contractor was no longer working for the Department when the contravention came to light. In the case of the official, appropriate disciplinary action was taken. Neither case involved Ministers or special advisers.
Mr Watson:
To ask the Secretary of State for Education what recent guidance he has issued to (a) Ministers, (b) officials and (c) special advisers in
1 May 2012 : Column 1512W
his Department on the use of private e-mail accounts to discuss items of Government business; and if he will make a statement. [90468]
Tim Loughton: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many people have contacted his Department on official business using the Mrs Blurt email account since May 2010. [94256]
Tim Loughton: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Lisa Nandy: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what recent representations he has received from the Information Commissioner’s Office on the use of private emails and the Freedom of Information Act 2000. [97217]
Tim Loughton: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Departmental Responsibilities
Mr Nicholas Brown: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what his Ministerial engagements were between 27 March and 16 April 2012. [106014]
Tim Loughton: It has not been possible to respond to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.
Disclosure of Information
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education when his Department most recently appealed a Decision Notice issued by the Information Commissioner; and how much his Department spent on legal fees to challenge that decision under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. [99467]
Tim Loughton [holding answer 12 March 2012]: The Department's most recent appeal was lodged in March 2012. To date no payments have been made in respect of external litigation services on that case.
The costs of internal legal advice relating to the case are not held in such a way that they can be separately identified.
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how much his Department has spent on legal advice in respect of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 since September 2011. [99468]
Tim Loughton [holding answer 12 March 2012]: The Department has since September 2011 spent £18,546.86 on external legal advice and litigation services relating to two FOIA Decision Notices issued by the Information Commissioner's Office in 2011 or earlier, and a further £1,575 on general FOIA advice from counsel. The costs of internal legal advice on FOIA matters are not held in such a way that they can be separately identified.
1 May 2012 : Column 1513W
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether (a) he and (b) his special advisers have used the private e-mail account known as Mrs Blurt to discuss (i) the decision to cancel the Building Schools for the Future Programme in Sandwell and (ii) other Government business since 2010; on how many occasions any such usage took place; and if he will make a statement. [90422]
Tim Loughton: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education pursuant to the answer to the hon. Member for Liverpool, West Derby of 11 January 2012, Official Report, column 317W, on e-mail, whether (a) he and (b) his special advisers used private e-mail accounts to discuss the decision to cancel the Building Schools for the Future Programme in Sandwell; and if he will place in the Library a copy of any such item of correspondence. [90450]
Tim Loughton: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education on what date he received advice from the Cabinet Office that private e-mail accounts were outside the scope of the Freedom of Information Act 2000; from whom he received that advice; in what format it was received; and if he will place in the Library a copy of that advice. [93892]
Tim Loughton: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Mr Denham: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what his policy is on the period for which e-mails sent and received by (a) Ministers, (b) officials, and (c) special advisers in his Department are retained; and whether such e-mails are recoverable from the IT systems in his Department after that period. [102944]
Tim Loughton: It has not been possible to reply to the hon. Member in the time available before Prorogation.
Computers
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many requests have been made to his Department's IT department from (a) Ministers, (b) officials and (c) special advisers requesting information about the process of replacing their desktop computers in the last 12 months. [93237]
Tim Loughton: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Grammar Schools
Stephen Twigg: To ask the Secretary of State for Education (1) what his Department's policy is on the establishment of a satellite grammar school as proposed by Kent County Council for Sevenoaks; [105283]
1 May 2012 : Column 1514W
(2) whether his Department would allow the establishment of a satellite campus of an existing grammar school following amendments to the Admissions Code in 2012. [105284]
Mr Gibb [holding answer 24 April 2012]: Current legislation prohibits the introduction of a new wholly selective maintained school or academy and we have no plans to change this.
Kent county council, in response to an e-petition from parents in Sevenoaks, voted for an expansion of grammar school provision onto additional sites in that area. The ability to open a satellite school has been in place since the Education Act 1944 and the recent amendments to the Admissions Code to enable all types of school to be able to increase their admissions number make no change to that. Any proposal to open a selective satellite school would have to be compatible with legislation preventing the introduction of new selective schools into our education system.
Home Education
Caroline Dinenage: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many children were being home-schooled in (a) Hampshire and (b) England in the latest period for which figures are available. [106294]
Mr Gibb: It has not proved possible to respond to my hon. Friend in the time available before Prorogation.
Home Education: Standards
Caroline Dinenage: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what assessment his Department has made of the extent to which local authorities are fulfilling their duty to identify home-schooled children who are not receiving a suitable education. [106293]
Mr Gibb: It has not been possible to respond to my hon. Friend in the time available before Prorogation.
Caroline Dinenage: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what steps his Department has taken to ensure that parents who are home educating their children are actually delivering a suitable education for their children. [106295]
Mr Gibb: It has not proved possible to respond to my hon. Friend in the time available before Prorogation.
Caroline Dinenage: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what steps his Department has taken to ensure that children who are being educated at home are receiving an education suitable to their age, ability and aptitude, as required by section 7 of the Education Act 1996; and what criteria are used to define a suitable education. [106296]
Mr Gibb: It has not proved possible to respond to my hon. Friend in the time available before prorogation.
Jobcentres: Training
Fiona Mactaggart: To ask the Secretary of State for Education what evidence on the effectiveness of provision of learning within Jobcentre Plus centres he took account of before deciding to end inspections of such provision. [103430]
1 May 2012 : Column 1515W
Chris Grayling: I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Department for Work and Pensions.
The decision to end external inspection was based on reducing onerous and unnecessary interference in the business of organisations contracted to deliver DWP employment programmes, use of existing internal assurance processes and financial savings (£4.2 million per annum). Evidence of the effectiveness of learning through contracted employment provision offered by Jobcentre Plus did not form part of the criteria.
Legal Costs
Mr Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how much his Department spent on fees for legal work in (a) 2010-11 and (b) 2011-12; and if he will make a statement. [104547]
Tim Loughton: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Literacy: Standards
Andrew Selous: To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether it is still national guidance that teachers should correct no more than three spelling mistakes in a piece of work in order not to harm a child's self-esteem. [106341]
Mr Gibb: It has not been possible to respond to my hon. Friend in the time available before Prorogation.
Ministers’ Private Offices
Mr Watson: To ask the Secretary of State for Education how many (a) desktop and (b) laptop computers are available for use by him and his staff in his Private Office. [96937]
1 May 2012 : Column 1516W
Tim Loughton: It has not been possible to reply to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Pupils: Disadvantaged
Stephen Twigg: To ask the Secretary of State for Education whether the service premium is no longer being withdrawn from those pupils who have a parent who has died in service. [105281]
Mr Gibb: It has not proved possible to respond to the hon. Member before Prorogation.
Alison Seabeck: To ask the Secretary of State for Education which schools in Plymouth unitary authority have received funding from the pupil premium; and how many pupils in each such school have attracted payment of the pupil premium. [105817]
Sarah Teather: The pupil premium was introduced in April 2011 and allocations have so far been made for the 2011-12 financial year only. For 2011-12 the pupil premium funding is £488 per pupil in respect of pupils known to be eligible for free school meals (FSM), and for children in care who have been continuously looked-after for at least six months and £200 per pupil for those whose parents are serving in the armed forces.
In 2011-12 the total pupil premium allocation for schools in Plymouth local authority was £3,633,000, in respect of 8,760 eligible pupils. This includes 6,272 pupils eligible for the deprivation premium, 256 eligible for the looked-after premium and 2,236 eligible for the service premium.
The allocation for each school in Plymouth for 2011-12 is shown in the following table. It is not possible to present at school level eligible looked-after children, service children and FSM pupils recorded on the Alternative Provision census. This is because of the way we collect data for these pupils and for data protection reasons.
| State-funded primary, secondary and special schools, and pupil referral units (1, 2, 3, 4) : Number of pupils eligible for the pupil premium in 2011/12 (8, 9) Plymouth | |||||
| Deprivation pupil premium (6) | |||||
| URN | LA Estab | School name | Number on roll (5) | Number of pupils eligible for the deprivation pupil premium | Allocation for the deprivation pupil premium 2011/12 (7) (£) |
1 May 2012 : Column 1517W
1 May 2012 : Column 1518W
1 May 2012 : Column 1519W
1 May 2012 : Column 1520W
| x = less than 5 pupils or a percentage based on less than 5 pupils or an allocation amount based on less than 5 pupils. * = Allocations for these schools are not included as they are either a maintained special school or PRU. The premium for these establishments is held with the local authority (please see the conditions of grant) 1. Includes middle schools as deemed. 2. Includes primary academies. 3. Includes city technology colleges and secondary academies. 4. Includes maintained special schools, excludes general hospital schools and non-maintained special schools. 5. Full-time equivalent (FTE) pupils in year groups R-11 (where National Curriculum year groups do not apply pupils aged 4 to 15). For all those aged 5 and over includes sole or dual main registrations only. In Pupil Referral Units, FTE pupils aged 4 (all registration types) and headcount of pupils aged 5 to 15 (sole or dual main registrations as well as pupils who are registered with other providers and further education colleges). 6. Full-time equivalent (FTE) number of pupils known to be eligible for and claiming free school meals in year groups R-11, (where National Curriculum year groups do not apply pupils aged 4 to 15). For all those aged 5 and over includes sole or dual main registrations only. In Pupil Referral Units, FTE pupils aged 4 (all registration types) and headcount of pupils aged 5-15 (sole or dual main registrations as well as pupils who are registered with other providers and further education colleges) known to be eligible for and claiming free school meals. 7. Each FSM eligible pupil will attract £488 through the pupil premium. For pupils in maintained primary and secondary schools funding will be passed to schools via the Local Authorities. Academies will receive funding from the YPLA. For pupils in maintained special schools and PRU's funding will be allocated to local authorities to decide whether to pass on funding to the education setting or to hold back funding to manage centrally for the benefit of those pupils it has responsibility for. 8. The number of eligible Looked After Children and FSM pupils recorded on the Alternative Provision census are not included in school level tables (although are eligible for the pupil premium) as they are taken from Local Authority returns. 9. The number of service children are not provided at school level due to data protection issues. | |||||