Parc Prison

Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many (a) deaths, (b) suicides and (c) incidents of self-harm were reported at Parc Prison, Bridgend, in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement; [109025]

(2) what the percentage of population to certified normal accommodation was for Parc Prison, Bridgend, in each of the last five years; and if he will make a statement; [109026]

(3) how many prisoners are held in Parc Prison, Bridgend; and what the (a) operational capacity and (b) certified normal accommodation of Parc Prison, Bridgend, is. [109027]

Mr Blunt: The information is as follows.

PQ 109025

Table 1: Deaths and self-harm incidents at HMP Parc
  2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Total deaths

4

1

3

3

1

Of which:

         

Self-inflicted

2

0

1

0

1

Natural causes

2

1

2

3

0

           

Self-harm incidents

285

189

283

433

387

These figures are derived from Safety In Custody Statistics 2010 which can be found at:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/statistics/prisons-and-probation/safety-in-custody

The figures for 2011 are due to be published in July 2012.

At prison level, rises or falls in numbers of deaths or self-harm incidents from one year to the next are not a good indicator of underlying trend.

PQs 109026 and 109027

The population, operational capacity and occupancy rate of HMP Parc, as defined by the percentage of population, to in-use certified normal accommodation is published for the last working Friday in April in each of the last five years and is set out in the following table.

As at April each year : Population Operational c apacity In use certified normal accommodation Percentage population to in use certified normal accommodation

2007

1,111

1,114

838

133

2008

1,181

1,170

838

141

2009

1,197

1,200

838

143

2010

1,187

1,200

838

142

2011

1,464

1,474

1,170

125

2012

1,432

1,474

1,170

122

22 May 2012 : Column 631W

Prisons are not expected to accommodate more prisoners than their agreed Operational Capacity. Where centrally held records indicate that population exceeds Operational Capacity, as in April 2008 above, this is due to a number of authorised absences from the prison. An authorised absence can be for a number of reasons, such as release to outside hospital or for release on temporary licence to assist with prisoner resettlement. Release on temporary licence requires a prisoner to be absent from prison for at least one night. These prisoners are required to return to prison after their temporary release has concluded and are therefore counted as part of the prison population.

This information is published monthly on the MOJ website via the following link:

http://www.justice.gov.uk/statistics/prisons-and-probation/prison-population-figures

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.

Parc Young Offender Institution

Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many cases have been referred to an outside adjudicator for breaches of prison rules in Parc Young Offender Institution in each month of the last two years; [106717]

(2) how many additional days of imprisonment have been awarded to children in Parc Young Offender Institution by an outside adjudicator for breaches of prison rules in each month of the last two years; [106718]

(3) what the ethnicity is of each child awarded additional days of imprisonment by outside adjudicators in Parc Young Offender Institution in each month of the last two years. [106719]

Mr Blunt: There have been no (zero) cases referred to an outside adjudicator for breaches of prison rules in Parc under-18 Youth Offenders Institution (YOI) in the last two years and therefore no (zero) additional days of imprisonment awarded to children of any ethnicity.

This data has been provided by the Youth Justice Board (YJB) from Parc under-18 Young Offender Institution (YOI).

These figures have been drawn from YOI records. As such they are subject to possible recording errors and can be subject to change over time.

Prisoners

Mr David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many prisoners were prosecuted for (a) arson and (b) drug offences in each of the last five years. [108510]

Mr Blunt: The Ministry of Justice Court Proceedings Database holds information on defendants proceeded against, found guilty and sentenced for criminal offences in England and Wales. This database holds information on offences provided by the statutes under which proceedings are brought but not the specific circumstances of each case. It is not possible to identify from this centrally held information whether a defendant is serving, or has served, a custodial sentence.

22 May 2012 : Column 632W

The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) takes the incidence of deliberate fire setting (arson) within prisons very seriously and is currently undertaking work to reduce the number of fire incidents in cells. A Cell Fires Reduction Working Group is developing a strategy to tackle the issues.

The Government is committed to tackling the supply of drugs into prisons. As part of the drugs strategy NOMS is investigating new technologies to tackle drugs and mobile phones in prisons. It is also increasing the number of drug free wings in prisons, where increased security measures prevent access to drugs.

David Wright: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will take steps to ensure that prisoners approaching discharge have their benefit and housing entitlements reviewed to ensure they can fully rehabilitate themselves on leaving prison. [108607]

Mr Blunt: Prisoners are asked about benefits by DWP staff working in prisons at induction. Since March all offenders have their jobseeker's allowance (JSA) claims processed prior to release by Jobcentre Plus employment benefit advisers who also provide advice on employment opportunities and financial support. Those applying for JSA on release are mandated to the Work programme on day one, expected to be 30,000 a year. This also applies to those who claim JSA within 13 weeks.

In order to avoid losing tenancies and housing benefits. NOMS carries out an Initial Housing Needs Assessment (IHNA) within four days of reception into custody. Prisons are also required to ensure that offenders are able to access existing housing advice services in the community. This advice is provided either by trained prison staff, or by voluntary sector providers such as NACRO, St Giles Trust, St Mungos' and Shelter.

Prisoners’ Incentives and Earned Privileges Scheme

Simon Reevell: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what recent assessment he has made of the Incentives and Earned Privilege Scheme. [108641]

Mr Blunt: Prison Rule 8 and Young Offender Institution (YOI) Rule 6 require every prison and YOI to provide a system of privileges which can be granted to prisoners or young offenders in addition to the minimum entitlements under the rules, subject to their reaching and maintaining specified standards of conduct and performance. The national Incentives and Earned Privileges Scheme (IEP) policy framework applies to all prison and YOIs, but governors or directors may exempt prisoners from the scheme who have progressed on to a structured resettlement programme, for whom other forms of incentive will apply.

All prison governors have devolved responsibility to operate a local scheme of incentives and earned privileges based upon the principles established under the national IEP policy framework. The national policy framework requires that establishments review and evaluate their own schemes annually to ensure they continue to be relevant to their local aims and population, including different ethnic groups.

The national IEP policy framework was reviewed in 2010-11 as part of the National Offender Management

22 May 2012 : Column 633W

Service (NOMS) Specification, Benchmarking and Costing Programme, with the IEP scheme forming a component part of the Residential Services Specification. A revised Prison Service Instruction (PSI 11/2011) was also issued, a copy of which is in the House Library. PSI 11/2011 did not introduce any substantive changes to the previous national IEP policy framework.

More recently an internal audit of the system was carried out as part of the NOMS's 2011-12 Audit Plan.

Prisoners’ Release: Foreign Nationals

Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice with reference to the answer of 16 June 2011, Official Report, columns 920-3W, on foreign nationals: prisoners, how many foreign nationals convicted of (a) rape, (b) sexual offences against children, (c) other sexual offences and (d) a violent offence were released from prison after serving custodial sentences of (i) less than one year, (ii) between one and two years, (iii) between two and three years, (iv) between three and four years, (v) between four and five years, (vi) between five and six years, (vii) between six and seven years, (viii) between seven and eight years, (ix) between eight and nine years, (x) between nine and 10 years, (xi) between 10 and 11 years, (xii) between 11 and 12 years, (xiii) between 12 and 15 years, (xiv) between 15 and 20 years and (xv) over 20 years in 2011. [109042]

Mr Blunt: The following table shows the number of foreign national prisoners released from determinate sentences for (a) rape, (b) other sexual offences, and (c)violence against the person offences, by detailed sentence length band in 2011. From the data held centrally, it is not possible to separately identify those offenders convicted of sexual offences against children; they are included with other sexual offences.

Foreign national prisoners discharged from determinate sentences, for rape, other sexual offences and violence against the person, England and Wales, 2011
  Rape Other sexual offences Violence against the person

Total

101

138

1,172

Less than one year

0

58

818

1 years to less than 2 years

2

30

145

2 years to less than 3 years

2

14

67

3 years to less than 4 years

7

9

41

4 years to less than 5 years

10

9

35

5 years to less than 6 years

13

8

18

6 years to less than 7 years

11

5

15

7 years to less than 8 years

13

0

10

8 years to less than 9 years

9

3

7

9 years to less than 10 years

10

1

5

10 years to less than 11 years

10

0

2

11 years to less than 12 years

3

1

4

12 years to less than 15 years

10

0

4

15 years to less than 20 years

1

0

1

22 May 2012 : Column 634W

20 years to less than life

0

0

0

Note: The data presented in this table are drawn from administrative IT systems. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system.

Prisoners: Repatriation

Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many foreign national prisoners from EU countries were transferred to the country of their nationality under the Council of Europe's prisoner transfer arrangements in each of the last five years. [108902]

Mr Blunt: From 1 January 2007 to 31 December 2011 a total of 258 prisoners have been transferred from England and Wales to the European Union member state of their nationality under the Council of Europe Convention on the Transfer of Sentenced Persons. The breakdown for each of the last five years is as follows:

  Number

2007

102

2008

60

2009

36

2010

38

2011

22

The transfer of prisoners from Scotland and from Northern Ireland under the Convention is a matter for the relevant devolved Administration.

Prisons

Mr David Davis: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many incidences of (a) arson and (b) drug dealing were recorded in prisons in each of the last five years. [108503]

Mr Blunt: Information on the number of incidents of arson and drug dealing in prisons in the past five years is not held centrally. Recorded instead is the number of fire and drugs incidents.

The number of fire and drugs incidents occurring in prisons in England and Wales in each of the past five years is given in the following table:

Financial year Fire Drugs

2007-08

1,066

5,582

2008-09

1,046

5,451

2009-10

906

4,962

2010-11

950

4,204

2011-12

966

4,638

Total

4,934

24,837

Drug incidents include seizures of drugs and drug taking paraphernalia. Fire incidents include all fires occurring in prisons including small cell fires. The number of these incidents that relate specifically to arson and drug dealing cannot be differentiated without incurring disproportionate cost.

22 May 2012 : Column 635W

All figures in this answer have been drawn from live administrative data systems which may be amended at any time. Although care is taken when processing and analysing the returns, the detail collected is subject to the inaccuracies inherent in any large scale recording system. These figures may change should any further incidents relating to this period be identified and reported.

The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) takes the incidence of deliberate fire setting (arson) within prisons very seriously and is currently undertaking work to reduce the number of fire incidents in cells. A Cell Fires Reduction Working Group is developing a strategy to tackle the issues.

The Government is committed to tackling the supply of drugs into prisons. As part of the drugs strategy NOMS is investigating new technologies to tackle drugs and mobile phones in prisons. It is also increasing the number of drug free wings in prisons, where increased security measures prevent access to drugs.

Probation

Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what steps (a) he has taken since 2010 and (b) he plans to take during the next six months to reduce the time spent by probation officers employed by probation services on paperwork and administrative tasks; and what estimate he has made of the time spent by probation officers on paperwork and administrative tasks in an average (i) day, (ii) week and (iii) month in the latest period for which figures are available. [107558]

Mr Blunt: In March 2010, the National Offender Management Service (NOMS) launched an Offender Engagement Programme to deliver improved outcomes, including reduced reoffending, by increasing the quantity and quality of one-to-one engagement between probation practitioners and offenders. This includes work to reduce the bureaucratic demands on operational staff. The number of targets probation trusts are measured against has been reduced by 40%, allowing a greater focus on achieving outcomes as opposed to measuring inputs and processes. The National Standards for the Management of Offenders have been revised so as greatly to reduce the burdens they place on front-line staff.

Work to focus resources on the front line is progressing. In the next six months, the Offender Engagement Programme will continue to test and make available new evidence-based approaches to support front-line practitioners.

Delivery structures across probation trusts vary, as do the requirements of specific roles, and NOMS does not routinely collect data on the proportion of time spent on paperwork and administrative tasks. In December 2008, a snapshot survey over a one-week period, based on a small sample of probation officers (POs) and probation service officers (PSOs), found that across England and Wales, 24% of PO/PSO time was spent in direct contact with offenders; 41% on computer activity; and 35% on other activities—such as dealing with correspondence, meetings, travel, etc. However, these results should be treated with caution. This was a quick survey to provide information to management: the methodology did not meet the rigorous standards applicable to published research.

22 May 2012 : Column 636W

Probation: Essex

Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how much was spent on (a) involuntary and (b) voluntary exit schemes at Essex Probation for staff at each grade in each year since 2009-10; how much it plans to spend in 2012-13; and if he will make a statement. [107550]

Mr Blunt: There have been no involuntary or voluntary exit schemes in Essex Probation Trust in 2009-10 or subsequent years and no schemes are planned for 2012-13.

Essex Probation contributed £25,000 towards the cost of an involuntary exit scheme relating to the closure of the East of England Probation Training Consortium in 2009-10. The six probation areas in the East of England region contributed a total of £90,000.

Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 Essex Probation has received since 2005; how many such requests were (a) agreed to and (b) refused in each year; whether any refusals were subject to appeal to the Information Commissioner; how many such appeals were successful; and if he will make a statement. [107554]

Mr Blunt: The following table shows the total number of Freedom of Information requests received by Essex Probation Trust since 2005.

  Total

2012

2

2011

7

2010

6

2009

0

2008

0

2007

3

2006

1

2005

4

Total

23

Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice on what date each property (a) owned and (b) leased by Essex Probation service was opened for occupation by the service; and what the estimated monetary value is of each such property. [107581]

Mr Blunt: Most of the estate occupied by Essex Probation Service was transferred to the Secretary of State (currently for Communities and Local Government) on 1 April 2001 by the Transfer of Property (Local Probation Boards and the Children and Family Court Advisory Service) Order 2001. Essex Probation also occupies offices in nine court buildings.

Probation service properties in Essex
Properties Tenure type Transfer date or lease date Rent (£ pa) Existing use value (£)

Carraway House, Basildon

Freehold

1 April 2001

n/a

(1)977,000

Five Wells, Thurrock

Freehold

1 April 2001

n/a

(1)650,000

Ashby House, Chelmsford

Leasehold

1 April 2001

116,500

n/a

Ryegate House, Colchester

Leasehold

1 April 2001

105,000

n/a

22 May 2012 : Column 637W

Cullen Mill, Witham

Leasehold

1 April 2001

41,000

n/a

Basildon Approved Premises

Freehold

1 April 2001

n/a

(2)475,000

Blue Heights, Southend

Leasehold

1 April 2001

140,000

n/a

4 Mitre Buildings, Harlow

Leasehold

25 October 2006

112,780

n/a

(1) At 1 April 2009. (2) Market value at 31 March 2011.

Mr Amess: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what relevant specialist qualifications the Chief Executive of Essex Probation service holds; what process was followed in their appointment; where the post was advertised; how many people applied for the post; how many were short-listed for interview; how each was appraised; and if he will make a statement. [107584]

Mr Blunt: Mary Archer was appointed Chief Executive of Essex Probation Trust on 1 April 2010. She had previously been Chief Officer of Essex Probation Board. The appointment, by the Secretary of State, followed an assessment process which included an interview with the Director of Offender Management for the East of England and the Trust Chair Designate. The purpose of the interview was to ascertain whether the candidate had the skills needed in the new role and to test her understanding of the new relationship with the Trust Chair and the National Offender Management Service.

Mary Archer has 30 years experience in every aspect of the work of the probation service. She holds a Certificate of Qualification in Social Work and a Chartered Management qualification. She was appointed OBE in 2010.

Redundancy

Mr Redwood: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many of his Department's employees have been made redundant in the last two years. [108075]

Mr Kenneth Clarke: There have been 73 redundancies for the period 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2012. This figure does not include civil servants who have been offered early departure under the Ministry's ongoing voluntary early departure scheme, which provides the same terms as voluntary redundancy under the Civil Service Compensation Scheme 2010.

Risk Assessment

Mr Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what strategic or transitional risk registers in each area of policy are held by his Department; and if he will make a statement. [107473]

Mr Kenneth Clarke: Within the Ministry of Justice, the Justice Policy Group is responsible for the delivery of policy. The Group maintains a risk register which is updated on a monthly basis to monitor top risks to the delivery of particular policies. In addition, risk registers are maintained by the Department in the following policy areas:

22 May 2012 : Column 638W

the Family Justice Review Implementation Programme, jointly with the Department of Education;

the implementation of the reforms on civil litigation and costs; and

the Offender Services Competition Portfolio Strategic Risk Register, maintained by the National Offender Management Service.

Trade Unions

Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many trade union representatives in (a) his Department and (b) each of its non-departmental public bodies had (i) part-time and (ii) full-time paid facility time arrangements in 2011-12; [107404]

(2) how many days were utilised for paid facility time by each trade union representative in (a) his Department and (b) each of its non-departmental public bodies in 2011-12; and at what cost to the public purse; [107405]

(3) how many days were utilised for paid facility time by each trade union representative in (a) his Department and (b) each of its non-departmental public bodies for trade union (i) duties and (ii) activities in 2011-12 [107406]

Mr Kenneth Clarke: For 2011-12, the Ministry of Justice (including its executive agencies) had 40.1 full-time equivalent (FTE) staff undertaking full-time employee representative duties. The number of part-time representatives is estimated to equate to 128.9 FTE.

As there are no central records held on the grades and pay rates of staff deployed on local employee representative duties, a disproportionate cost will be incurred to obtain this information.

For individual probation trusts there are no central facility time records. This is locally managed and to obtain this information will incur disproportionate cost. Of the other non-departmental public bodies, the Youth Justice Board (YJB) and Legal Services Commission (LSC) have their own employee representatives and facility time arrangements. There were no full-time representatives and 0.05 FTE part-time representatives in the YJB. There are 30 part-time trade union representatives in the LSC.

The Ministry of Justice and its non-departmental public bodies do not differentiate between trade union duties and activities when allocating facility time to representatives. The data are not held centrally and could not be provided without incurring disproportionate cost.

Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice if he will place in the Library copies of the facility time agreements between trade unions and (a) his Department and (b) each of its non-departmental public bodies. [107407]

Mr Kenneth Clarke: Copies of the current agreements for the Ministry of Justice will be placed in the Library. The Legal Services Commission and Youth Justice Board do not have formal facilities agreements covering their facility time arrangements.

The Department and its non-departmental public bodies will revise their facilities agreements following the forthcoming central review of facility time.

22 May 2012 : Column 639W

Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many trade union representatives in (a) his Department and (b) each of its non-departmental public bodies have faced disciplinary action for abusing paid facility time or public resources in each of the last five years. [107408]

Mr Kenneth Clarke: No trade union representative in either the Ministry of Justice or its non-departmental public bodies has faced disciplinary action in each of the last five years for abusing facility time or public resources.

Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many meetings have taken place between (a) his Department and (b) its non-departmental public bodies and trade union representatives utilising paid facility time in each of the last five years to discuss (i) collective bargaining, (ii) redundancies, (iii) negotiations relating to employment, pay and conditions and (iv) other trade union and industrial relations duties; and what the dates and times were of each meeting. [107409]

Mr Kenneth Clarke: Management in both the Ministry of Justice and its non-departmental public bodies meet regularly with trade union representatives at national and local levels to consult on a range of issues as detailed in the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidated) Act 1992. We do not maintain central records of all meetings that have been held, and to collate this information would incur disproportionate cost.

Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice on how many occasions trade union representatives from (a) his Department and (b) each of its non-departmental public bodies have utilised paid facility time to represent an employee at a meeting or other industrial relations matter in each of the last five years. [107410]

Mr Kenneth Clarke: Employees facing disciplinary procedures are legally entitled to representation from their trade union representative. We do not retain central records of instances where this has occurred in the Ministry of Justice or its non-departmental public bodies and to collate this information would incur disproportionate cost.

Young Offenders

Robert Flello: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice (1) how many young people in all parts of the secure youth estate transferred to the adult estate due to their age in each of the last three years; [108892]

(2) how many adult prisoners who committed suicide did so within five years of them transferring from any part of the youth estate in each of the last five years; [108894]

(3) how many children in any part of the secure youth estate came from families where one or both parents are or have been in prison during the last five years in each of the last five years. [108895]

Mr Blunt: The information is as follows:

22 May 2012 : Column 640W

(1) The number of prisoners being transferred from the secure youth estate to the adult estate due to their age are not recorded centrally. The numbers can only be determined by checking individual records.

(2) It is not possible to answer this question directly from centrally held records. However, we can provide information based on the offenders' ages at the time of death and when they first came into custody. As the adult prison estate can be defined as either those aged 18 and above or those aged 21 and above the following table shows the annual numbers of self-inflicted deaths for both age boundaries:

(i) those aged 18 or more who were under 18 when they were first admitted to custody,

(ii) those aged 21 or more who were under 21 when they were first admitted to custody

  Self-inflicted deaths of those age 18 or more at time of death who were under 18 on admission to custody and died within five years of turning 18 Self-inflicted deaths of those aged 21 or more at the time of death who were under 21 on admission to custody and died within five years of turning 21

2006

2

1

2007

1

6

2008

1

2

2009

1

4

2010

0

0

(3) Information on the custodial history of prisoners' parents are not recorded centrally. As a result the numbers of children in any part of the secure youth estate who come from families where one or both parents have been in prison are unknown.

Robert Flello: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what the reoffending rate was amongst young people who were released from the adult estate and had previously been held in any part of the secure youth estate in each of the last five years. [108893]

Mr Blunt: It is not possible from the Department's reoffending data to identify young people released form the adult estate who had previously been held in any part of the youth estate. However the following table shows the percentage of young people aged 18 to 20 years and 21 to 24 years who reoffended within one year of their release from prison in each year between 2005 and 2009 (the latest full calendar year available).

Percentage
  Proportion of offenders aged 18 to 20 years who reoffended Proportion of offenders aged 21 to 24 years who reoffended

2005

57.3

51.6

2006

59.6

51.4

2007

60.7

52.3

2008

58.4

51.8

2009

58.9

49.7

These figures are from the Ministry of Justice's published proven reoffending statistics for England and Wales. Proven reoffending is defined as any offence committed in a one year follow-up period and receiving a court conviction, caution, reprimand or warning in the one year follow-up. Following this one year period, a further six month waiting period is allowed for cases to progress through the courts.

22 May 2012 : Column 641W

Young Offenders: Greater Manchester

Andrew Gwynne: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice how many young adult offenders aged 18 to 20 years from the metropolitan borough of Tameside were held in (a) young offender institutions, (b) local prisons, (c) women's prisons and (d) other parts of the secure estate, in each month since May 2009. [107951]

Mr Blunt: All young offenders serving sentences of DYOI are held in appropriately designated young offender institution (YOI) accommodation within the prison

22 May 2012 : Column 642W

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 table shows the number of offenders aged 18 to 20-years-old from the metropolitan borough of Tameside 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.

  2009 2010 2011 2012
Prison function May Sep Nov Jan Mar May Jul Sep Nov Jan Mar

(a) Young offender institutions

22

17

12

17

13

20

14

23

25

22

23

(b) Local prisons

0

3

3

7

9

9

16

24

11

9

5

(c) Women's prisons

0

1

1

2

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

(d) Other parts of the secure estate

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

0

3

4

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 table above.

If no address is given, an offender's committal court address is used as a proxy for the area in which they are resident. These figures are also included in the table above. No address has been recorded and no court information is available for around 3% of all offenders, these figures are excluded from the table above.

Youth Justice Board

Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Justice what estimate he has made of the amount the Youth Justice Board will pay on average per place in a (a) local authority secure children's home, (b) secure training centre and (c) young offender institution, including VAT where applicable, as of 2 April 2012; and if he will make a statement. [106715]

Mr Blunt: The average price per place, including VAT where applicable, for the different sectors of the children and young people's secure estate as of 1 April 2012, are set out in the following table:

Service Average price per place per year as of 1 April 2012 (to the nearest £000)

Secure Children's Homes (SCH)

212,000

Secure Training Centres (STC)

188,000

Young Offender Institutions (YOI)

60,000

Notes: 1. While some contract costs are being met from within Ministry of Justice (MOJ) budgets, responsibility for commissioning secure accommodation places remains with the Youth Justice Board (YJB) and therefore the price per place includes all contracts relating to that particular sector, with VAT included on the YJB paid contracts and excluded from the MOJ paid contracts. 2. These figures are not intended to represent the total price of providing custody and related services to young people. For example, they do not include YJB funding to NOMS Prisoner Escort Management for the provision of prison escort and custodial services for young people. They also do not include YJB funding for reliance escorts, who undertake movements for sentenced young people between courts and secure training centres and secure children's homes and for transfers between these sectors. 3. Differences in the YJB funding streams included for these 2012-13 prices from the prices published for 1 April 2011 (2011-12 prices) are that: a. The YJB no longer commissions health services as part of contracts for secure children's home places; b. Social worker funding to young offender institutions is included. 4. Advocacy services funded by the YJB are included in secure training centre and young offender institution prices, based upon a full year's budget allocation calculated using prices as at 1 April 2012. Advocacy services required to be provided by local authorities for secure children's homes are part-funded through YJB contracts for these places. 5. For court ordered secure remand places in the secure training centre sector, the YJB recovers one third of the costs from young people's home local authorities. 6. The YJB has since 1 April 2011 no longer had funding responsibility for young people's substance misuse services. The YJB does still pay a young people's substance misuse services contribution for young people's places at HMP and YOI Parc. 7. For the Young Offender Institution sector price: a. Different types of young offender institution services are covered: private and public sector young offender institutions, young women's dedicated units, long-term (sentenced) units, and the Keppel Unit; b. For public young offender institutions, the MOJ business rates, maintenance charges and capital charges have been estimated based upon 2010-11 levels and revised to reflect changes to the children's and young peoples estate since that time. The 2011-12 charges are currently being agreed by MOJ Estates Group and the YJB; c. YJB funding for the contract for Lucy Faithfull Foundation services is included; d. YJB funding for the central juvenile awareness staff programme (JASP) is included: JASP is currently being revised and so young offender institution-level budgets will not be agreed until the cost-impact of the revisions has been analysed.

22 May 2012 : Column 643W


Work and Pensions

Atos Healthcare

Tom Greatrex: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, with reference to the answer of 1 May 2012 to the hon. Member for Cardiff West, Official Report, column 1407W, on Atos, what the monetary value was of each contract between his Department and Atos in (a) 2008-09, (b) 2009-10 and (c) 2010-11. [107219] [Official Report, 5 November 2012, Vol. 552, c. 1MC.]

Chris Grayling: The spend values for the five DWP contracts with Atos are as follows:

£
Policy area Spend in 2008-09 Spend in 2009-10 Spend in 2010-11

Medical Services

111,800

99,100,000

112,800,000

Tell Us Once—Tell Us Once Release A

2,568,409

2,214,608

2,471,873

enGage (Government Gateway)

22,933,466

20,560,958

15,745,685

Occupational Health

0

0

9,840,000

Community Action Programme

0

0

0

Notes: 1. There are £0 spend values against the Community Action Programme contract because (a) it did not exist until November 2011 and (b) the outcome- based payment model used will only see costs becoming due in early 2012-13. 2. There are £0 spend values against the Occupational Health contract because it did not exist in the 2008-09 and 2009-10 financial years.

Carbon Emissions

Luciana Berger: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what his Department's total level of carbon emissions was between (a) 1 April 2010 and 1 April 2011 and (b) 2 April 2011 and 1 April 2012. [108577]

Chris Grayling: Data on carbon emissions are collected and published for the period 1 April to 31 March each year. The Department's total level of carbon emissions for 2010-11 and 2011-12 is shown in the following table.

DWP Emissions 2010-11 and 2011-12
  tCO 2 e emissions

1 April 2010 to 31 March 2011

187,336

1 April 2011 to 31 March 2012

156,796

Child Support Agency

Mr Buckland: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will take steps to ensure the Child Support Agency makes full use of its enforcement powers; and if he will take steps to ensure it makes such use of its enforcement powers after reform of the agency in 2013. [107831]

Maria Miller: The Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission is responsible for the child maintenance system. I have asked the Child Maintenance Commissioner to write to the hon. Member with the information requested, and I have seen the response.

Letter from Noel Shanahan:

In reply to your recent Parliamentary Question about the Child Support Agency, the Secretary of State promised a substantive reply from the Child Maintenance Commissioner as the Child Support Agency is now the responsibility of the Child Maintenance and Enforcement Commission.

22 May 2012 : Column 644W

You asked the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will take steps to ensure the Child Support Agency makes full use of its enforcement powers; and if he will take steps to ensure it makes such use of its enforcement powers after reform of the Agency in 2013.[107831]

The Commission has at its disposal a range of strong enforcement powers, intended to ensure all parents fulfil their financial responsibilities towards their children; and we are using all of the powers available to us where it is appropriate to do so - for example, we are increasing the use we make of deductions from non-resident parents' bank accounts and orders for sale of their property. In fact, the latest figures in the March 2012 Child Support Agency Quarterly Summary of Statistics show deduction of monies from bank accounts has trebled since 2009. Additionally, driving disqualifications for non-payment have risen eightfold since 2008. Enforcement information is routinely published in the Child Support Agency Quarterly Summary of Statistics which is available using the following link:

http://www.childmaintenance.org/en/pdf/qss/Qss_mar_2012.pdf

It is important to note that the Commission will need to take into consideration, when deciding if and what type of enforcement action to take, a number of factors including the welfare of any relevant children involved and the likeliness of collecting monies owed. Taking enforcement action can be a costly process, particularly in cases where the non-resident parent is determined not to pay - we must therefore take this into consideration and ensure we maximise the efficiency and effectiveness of our enforcement system. There is nothing to be gained by pursuing expensive court action in cases where this has little chance of ensuring people meet their obligations and securing money for children.

In the future, the introduction of the new child maintenance scheme will bring greater automation and in turn more alerts to identify quickly people who fall into debt. Once the new scheme is introduced, this will give us additional capacity to pursue effective debt collection, including taking tougher enforcement action against those who continue to evade their responsibilities.

The Government has recently reconfirmed its commitment to introducing further enforcement powers for use against parents who refuse to pay, when the time is right. The proposed forthcoming integration of the child maintenance system into the Department for Work and Pensions will ensure full Ministerial accountability for the use of these far-reaching powers.

Disability: Grants

Andrew Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what progress has been made on the allocation of grants to user-led organisations to support disabled people; and what level of grants have been made (a) nationally and (b) in Yorkshire and the Humber in the latest period for which figures are available. [107876]

Maria Miller: Since the launch of the Disabled People's User-Led Organisations programme in July 2011, a variety of local disabled people's user-led organisations throughout England have benefited from both financial and non-financial support.

Since September 2011, six Facilitation Fund Boards have been held, 61 applications have been considered and of these 41 have been successful.

The total amount awarded to date is £509,124.

In the Yorkshire and Humberside area five organisations have been successful and received awards totalling £49,227.

The average value of an award made to DPULOs in the Yorkshire and Humberside area is £9,845.

The programme encourages DPULOs to develop innovative ideas to support disabled people. For example, in Yorkshire and Humberside funding has been awarded to develop a new model of delivering social care.

22 May 2012 : Column 645W

Employment Schemes: East Midlands

Gloria De Piero: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people are on the Work programme in (a) Ashfield constituency, (b) Nottinghamshire and (c) the east midlands. [109044]

Chris Grayling: Official statistics on Work programme referrals and attachments up to the end of January 2012 were published on 9 May 2012. The information requested can be found via the Tabulation Tool published on the Department's website:

http://83.244.183.180/WorkProg/tabtool.html

Gloria De Piero: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many people in Ashfield constituency have been on the Work programme for more than 12 months. [109099]

Chris Grayling: The Work programme started in June 2011. Official statistics on Work programme referrals and attachments up to the end of January 2012 were published on 9 May 2012. The information requested can be found via the Tabulation Tool published on the Department's website:

http://83.244.183.180/WorkProg/tabtool.html

Jobcentre Plus: Training

Mr Evennett: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what training Jobcentre Plus staff receive to assist people with learning disabilities. [107651]

Chris Grayling: The Department for Work and Pensions policy is to develop its staff in the skills required to support a range of customers and claimants, to respect their individual needs, including those related to their health conditions. This approach ensures that they are skilled to deal with a diverse set of circumstances, while treating everyone as individuals.

All Jobcentre Plus staff receive foundation learning, which covers excellent customer service, diversity and claimants' needs. This learning encompasses the wide range of circumstances that our claimants may have, some less obvious than others, and stresses how important it is to look for signs where the claimant does not give us this information directly and to offer appropriate support.

Jobcentre Plus personal advisers, in particular, have access to a comprehensive learning programme. The training focuses on raising awareness of the individual's personal circumstances and also recognises that disabilities and health conditions can affect individuals in different ways. Disability employment advisers receive additional learning appropriate to this specialist area. Their training has been designed in conjunction with specialist DWP occupational psychologists to enable advisers to provide effective support to people with particular complex needs.

All staff have access to the Hidden Impairment Toolkit, which provides practical advice and guidance on how best to support individuals into employment. This approach enables the anticipation of reasonable adjustments at appropriate stages of the individual's journey to work.

22 May 2012 : Column 646W

Jobseeker's Allowance: Lone Parents

Cathy Jamieson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many lone parents are in receipt of jobseeker's allowance in Kilmarnock and Loudoun constituency. [108348]

Chris Grayling [holding answer 22 May 2012]: These statistics have not previously been published as official statistics. We will consider whether to include the statistics requested in part of an upcoming statistics release in line with the Code of Practice on Official Statistics.

For information, the headline volumes broken down by age of youngest child, age of lone parent, gender, ethnicity and region are available at:

http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/asd1/jsa/lone_parents/index.php?page=jsalp

Personal Independence Payment

Mrs McGuire: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many disabled young people aged between 16 and 25 years his Department consulted on the design of the personal independence payments assessment; and what the format was of consultation. [108197]

Maria Miller: The assessment for personal independence payment is being designed to be applicable to individuals from age 16 onwards. Our proposals for the assessment criteria have been developed in collaboration with a group of independent experts in health and disability and with considerable input from disabled people and disability organisations. We have recently completed a 15-week public consultation on the second draft of the personal independence payment assessment criteria, receiving around 1,000 responses, including representations from the National Deaf Children's Society, Contact a Family, Every Disabled Child Matters and The Children's Society. Information is not held on the number of respondents to the consultation who were disabled young people.

We are currently considering all of the comments received in the consultation very carefully as we evaluate what further improvements to the assessment criteria need to be made. We intend to publish a response to the consultation alongside a revised draft of the assessment criteria later in the year, once our considerations are complete.

In addition to this ongoing work in respect of the assessment criteria, we have engaged and will continue to engage extensively with some of the main organisations representing disabled young people as well as individuals themselves as we develop our proposals for delivery of personal independence payment for this group.

Mr David: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps his Department has taken in implementing the personal independence payment to ensure that those carrying out face-to-face assessments have information and training on deafblindness. [108401]

Maria Miller: The Department is currently in the process of tendering for providers to deliver the personal independence payment assessment from the recently

22 May 2012 : Column 647W

announced Health and Disability framework, with a view to signing contracts with the successful providers by summer 2012.

The assessment will require the assessor to look at the impact of conditions and impairments on individuals' everyday lives. This requires a very different skill set from those involved in the treatment of individuals, with less need for specialist knowledge. It is therefore not our intention to make assessors experts in every condition.

Assessors will all be trained and experienced health professionals and will be required to have a broad training in disability analysis as well as on specific impairments, including sensory impairments such as deafblindess. This training will be supported by guidance documents

We will also seek to work with disabled people and their representatives—including those representing people who are deafblind—exploring the scope for involving them in detailed plans for implementing the new benefit, including where possible in the development of training and guidance material to ensure that they are appropriate.

Mr David: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps his Department has taken in implementing the personal independence payment to ensure that disabled people with long-term conditions will not need to attend face-to-face assessments where there is sufficient written evidence. [108402]

Maria Miller: We believe it is right for the assessment to look at disabled people as individuals and not just label them by their health condition or impairment. That's why personal independence payment is being designed to consider an individual's personal circumstances and the support they need, rather than basing eligibility on any medical condition.

Although we believe that face-to-face consultations will be an important part of the assessment process, we have made it very clear that we intend to deliver this policy in a sensitive and proportionate way. Therefore, where we already have enough written evidence on which to make an accurate assessment of the claimant, such as from the claimant themselves or from individuals involved in supporting the claimant, such as their GP, specialist or social worker, it would be inappropriate—and a waste of public money—to require these individuals to attend such a consultation. Individuals with long-term health conditions or impairments are particularly likely to have such evidence available to support their claim in this way.

Decisions on whether sufficient evidence has been gathered will be based on the circumstances of the case and guidance will be provided to support such decisions.

Mr David: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps his Department has taken to ensure that the criteria for the personal independence payment will recognise the difficulties experienced by deafblind people in accessing written information and verbal communication. [108403]

Maria Miller: By reforming disability living allowance the Government want to create a fairer, more transparent and sustainable system, ensuring that we continue to support disabled people—including those individuals who are deafblind—to live independent lives.

22 May 2012 : Column 648W

We have recently completed a 15-week public consultation of the personal independence payment assessment criteria, and received around 1,000 responses to this consultation.

During the consultation period officials met with organisations which represent individuals with sensory impairments on several occasions, including Sense and Deafblind Scotland. These meetings and the corresponding responses to the consultation we received have provided a wide range of very helpful suggestions about potential changes to the assessment criteria and have highlighted the barriers and costs that deafblind individuals face.

I can assure you that we are considering all of these comments very carefully as we evaluate what further improvements need to be made to the assessment criteria. As we have said, the development of the assessment criteria will be an iterative process, and if we need to make more changes to ensure it fairly reflects the needs of deafblind individuals, we will do so. We intend to publish a response to the consultation alongside a revised draft of the assessment criteria later in the year, once our considerations are complete.

Mr David: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what steps his Department has taken to ensure that the face-to-face assessment for the personal independence payment will be accessible to deafblind people. [108404]

Maria Miller: The Department is currently in the process of tendering for providers to deliver the personal independence payment assessment, with a view to signing contracts with the successful providers by summer 2012.

We want to ensure that all face-to-face consultations are carried out in locations that are accessible to claimants, whatever their health condition or impairment. Assessment providers will have to ensure that all sites which need to be accessed by claimants for their face-to-face consultation are compliant with the Equality Act 2010. Providers will be expected to carry out home visits if other locations are not appropriate or they feel that this would be preferable.

We also recognise and acknowledge that for some individuals, for example those who are deafblind, attending a consultation at an unfamiliar location could create an element of anxiety. We have therefore made it very clear that individuals who are asked to attend a face-to-face consultation will be able to bring another person with them, in order to support them or remove any anxiety they may feel in undertaking this process.

Poverty: Children

Ian Mearns: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many children living in poverty after housing costs have been deducted are in families with gross household earnings of more than (a) £1,000 per year, (b) £4,000 per year, (c) £6,000 per year and (d) £7,500 per year. [107925]

Maria Miller: Estimates of the number and proportion of children living in poverty are published in the Households Below Average Income (HBAI) series. HBAI uses household income adjusted (or ‘equivalised’) for household size and composition to provide a proxy for standard of living.

22 May 2012 : Column 649W

The latest year for which data are available is 2009-10. The following table shows the number of children with income below 60% of contemporary median income, after housing costs (AHC), split by annual gross household earnings (£ per year), who earn more than £1,000, £4,000, £6,000 and £,7500 respectively.

Number of children with incomes below 60% of contemporary equivalised household median income, After Housing Costs, by gross annual earnings of the household, United Kingdom
Annual gross household earnings (£) Number of children (million)

More than £1,000

2.0

More than £4,000

1.9

More than £6,000

1.7

More than £7,500

1.5

Notes: 1. These statistics are based on Households Below Average Income (HBAI) data sourced from the 2009-10 Family Resources Survey (FRS). This uses disposable household income, adjusted using modified OECD equalisation factors for household size and composition, as an income measure as a proxy for standard of living and is available at: http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/index.php?page=hbai_arc 2. The standard measure of child poverty captures children who live in a household with an equivalised income below 60% of median income, Before Housing Costs. 3. These figures have been presented on an After Housing Cost basis. For After Housing Costs, housing costs (such as rent, water rates, mortgage interest payments, buildings insurance payments and ground rent and service charges) are deducted from income. 4. Gross earnings have been used to answer the question. This includes earnings from employment and from self-employment. 5. The earnings bands requested are not mutually exclusive and the figures cannot be summed to provide a total number of children in low-income households. The band describes the lower band of earnings amounts. For example, the number of children in the ‘More than £1,000’ band will also include those children where the household has gross annual earnings of more than £4,000, £6,000 and £7,500. Similarly, the number of children in the ‘More than £4,000’ band will also include those children where the household has gross annual earnings of more than £6,000 and £7,500. 6. The earnings measure used here is unequivalised, i.e. it has not been adjusted for household size and composition. The low-income threshold has been equivalised in line with the HBAI publication. 7. All estimates are based on survey data and are therefore subject to a degree of uncertainty. Small differences should be treated with caution as these will be affected by sampling error and variability in non-response. 8. The reference period for HBAI figures is the financial year. 9. Numbers of children have been rounded to the nearest hundred thousand. 10. The Child Poverty Act 2010 sets four income-based UK-wide targets to be met by 2020. The targets are based on the proportion of children living in households with relative low income, combined low income and material deprivation, absolute low income and persistent poverty, Before Housing Costs. 11. It was announced in May that the 2009-10 results will be revised when the 2010-11 results come out. Further information is available at the following link: http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/hbai/hbai_revision_due_to_ni_tax_changes.pdf

Ian Mearns: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many children in Gateshead are living in poverty after housing costs have been deducted. [107929]

Maria Miller: Estimates of the number and proportion of children living in poverty, before and after housing costs have been deducted, are published in the Households Below Average Income (HBAI) series. HBAI uses household income adjusted (or 'equivalised') for household size and composition to provide a proxy for standard of living and is available at:

http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/index.php?page=hbai_arc

The sample size of this survey is not sufficient to provide estimates at local authority or constituency level. Data at regional level are available in the HBAI publication.

Procurement

Michael Dugher: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what proportion of his Department's expenditure on procurement has gone to small and medium-sized enterprises since May 2010. [107803]

22 May 2012 : Column 650W

Chris Grayling: The Department for Work and Pensions' procurement and payment systems are not currently configured to report on the proportion of procurement expenditure the Department has with small and medium- sized businesses. However, we are in the process of delivering this capability and expect completion by the middle of the 2012-13 financial year.

During the 23-month period from 1 May 2010 to 31 March 2012, the Department spent a total of £901.8 million with known small and medium-sized business suppliers. This represents 11.41 % of our total commercial spending in the period.

Michael Dugher: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions when his Department next expects to undertake a spend recovery audit to identify overpayments to suppliers caused by fraud or error. [107913]

Chris Grayling: DWP operates a thorough invoice validation and matching process to ensure that we avoid overpayments to suppliers.

It is the Department's intention to conduct an independent spend recovery audit by December 2013.

Remploy

Andrew Jones: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what support packages are available for Remploy workers in stage one factories. [107864]

Maria Miller: To help the transition from sheltered segregated employment into mainstream employment, we are committed to providing a comprehensive support package for all disabled members of Remploy staff affected by the Government announcement on the 7 March. This offer will be for individualised support for up to 18 months and we have set aside £8 million to support this work. The support package is designed to be flexible and will be tailored to meet each individual's specific needs through the development of a personalised action plan. This will be managed with the support of a personal case worker who will make best use of skills and experience from partner agencies and organisations both nationally and locally.

The support package will include access to work- related opportunities available from Remploy and Jobcentre Plus employer networks and we will also be working with other employers, including local employers, and the Employers Forum on Disability, to look to offer targeted work opportunities to help affected staff find new employment.

The support package will also include a personal budget to provide additional support, not available elsewhere, to help people who may have difficulties with the transition to mainstream employment

The support package includes making £1.5 million available for the Community Support Fund. This fund will support individuals to become involved in their local communities as well as providing support for those who wish to make the move from sheltered to mainstream employment. Local disabled people's user-led organisations and voluntary sector organisations will be able to apply for modest amounts of funding to take forward a variety of projects or activities to support disabled people in areas affected by the Sayce announcement.

22 May 2012 : Column 651W

Mr Betts: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether his Department has received any expressions of interest from private firms for the Sheffield Remploy manufacturing site. [107904]

Maria Miller: Remploy's commercial process under way is specific to Remploy businesses identified as stage 1 sites. Sheffield has been identified as a stage 2 site and is therefore not part of the current commercial process.

In stage 2, DWP will work with the Remploy Board to identify if it is possible that these factory businesses and Employment Services can be freed from Government control, including through employee-led commercial exit and/or open market sales, and how this might be achieved.

Further information about the proposals for these factories and businesses in stage 2 will be made available once Remploy have considered the most appropriate course of action.

Angie Bray: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what redundancy payment his Department plans to make to employees at the (a) Remploy factory in Acton and (b) other Remploy factories following closure of the factories. [108677]

Maria Miller: Remploy began collective consultation with employee representatives on 19 March 2012 on the proposal by the Remploy Board to close 36 factories, including the Acton factory. As part of collective consultation, the Remploy Board will consider all proposals to avoid compulsory redundancy. The proposed redundancy terms that will be offered to any Remploy employee who is, in the event, made redundant are under discussion as part of the collective consultation process. No final decisions have been made.

Risk Assessment

Mr Thomas: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what strategic or transitional risk registers in each area of policy are held by his Department; and if he will make a statement. [107467]

Chris Grayling: It would be disproportionately costly to list the totality of the risk registers held across all aspects of policy in the Department. However, it may be helpful to set out how risk is managed across the Department.

Senior Responsible Owners and the Permanent Secretary regularly brief Ministers on significant risks to delivery of both the Departments day-to-day business and our reform programme.

The Department holds a Strategic Risk Register which contains those risks that are reviewed by members of the Executive Team and the Audit Committee, or which carry such a priority that the responsibility for ensuring the risk is managed is owned by the Executive Team.

The Department's risk management framework also requires that each Director General carries out risk assessments to identify threats to the achievement of objectives in their business area.

For each of our significant reform or change programmes and projects, their Senior Responsible Owners are required to maintain risk registers for the risks inherent within their area, which could include any risks inherent in the transition from the current state to the future state.

22 May 2012 : Column 652W

Social Security Benefits

Mr Jim Cunningham: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what plans he has to change the method of calculating (a) disability benefits and (b) other benefits. [108282]

Chris Grayling: Apart from those changes set out in the Welfare Reform Act 2012, there are no current plans to change the method by which either disability or other benefits are calculated.

Social Security Benefits: Post Office Card Account

Cathy Jamieson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what estimate he has made of the number of people in Kilmarnock and Loudoun constituency who have benefits paid into a Post Office card account. [108995]

Steve Webb: The information is not available in the format requested as data held relate to benefit accounts rather than people. People may be in receipt of more than one benefit which could be paid into the same Post Office card account.

As at January 2012, around 8,500 benefit and pension accounts were being paid into a Post Office card account in Kilmarnock and Loudoun constituency.

Cathy Jamieson: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions whether people who have benefits paid into Post Office card accounts will be able to have universal credit payments paid into those accounts. [109003]

Chris Grayling: No decision has yet been made about whether claimants will be able to choose to have universal credit paid into Post Office card accounts and no estimate has been made of the number of claimants who might make that choice.

Trade Unions

Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many trade union representatives in (a) his Department and (b) each of its non-departmental public bodies had (i) part-time and (ii) full-time paid facility time arrangements in 2011-12. [107362]

Chris Grayling: The information is in the following table:

Number of part-time and full-time TU representatives, May 2012 (1)
  Part-time Full-time

DWP

(2)1,488

16

CMEC

142

3

Independent Living Fund

3

0

HSE

50

1

Remploy

177

5

Pensions Ombudsman

(3)1

(3)0

Pension Protection Fund Ombudsman

(3)

(3)

The Pensions Regulator

5

0

Disability Living Allowance Advisory Board(4)

Equality 2025(4)

22 May 2012 : Column 653W

Industrial Injuries Advisory Council(4)

Social Security Advisory Committee(4)

The Pensions Advisory Service(5)

National Employment Savings Trust (NEST) Corporation(5)

(1 )All totals include ULRs where appropriate (2) In the Department for Work and Pensions the amount of time available for use as facility time by TU representatives is capped at 0.2% of the Department's full-time equivalent staffing level at 1 April each year. This overall ceiling includes 16 full-time TU representatives. The number of part- time representatives changes on a frequent basis but the most recent data available, taken during 2011, show an estimated total of 1,488. This does not include Union Learning Representatives (ULRs). (3) Indicates brace. (4) These bodies do not employ any staff. (5) No TU reps.

Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many days were utilised for paid facility time by each trade union representative in (a) his Department and (b) each of its non-departmental public bodies in 2011-12; and at what cost to the public purse. [107363]

Chris Grayling: Individual responses for my Department and its non-departmental public bodies are detailed as follows:

Department for Work and Pensions

The Department for Work and Pensions is a large Government Department employing approximately 100,000 staff in a large network of sites across the country. There are 16 full-time TU reps employed in the Department for Work and Pensions, and this equates to a salary cost of £416,000 based on an average salary.

The monitoring of facility time allocations is managed by local managers who robustly manage individual rep’s applications for time off under the facility time agreement. For this reason the data you requested are not collated centrally for each TU representative.

I can, however, state that in the Department for Work and Pensions the amount of time available for use as facility time by TU representatives is capped at 0.2% of the Department's full-time equivalent (FTE) staffing level at 1 April each year.

In addition, 0.08% facility time is available for use by Union Learning Representatives (ULRs).

Non-departmental public bodies

CMEC

An average of 20.24 days per TU rep were utilised during the period 1 June 2011 to 29 February 2012. (CMEC uses an accounting period from June to May so the only data available in 2011-12 are from June to February).

Based on an average salary this equates to £201,836.

Independent Living Fund

Its three TU reps have utilised facility time as follows:

Rep 1: 4.1 days at a cost of £318

Rep 2: 19.7 days at a cost of £1,477

Rep 3: 63 days at a cost of £6,368.

22 May 2012 : Column 654W

Health and Safety Executive (HSE)

HSE is unable to state how many days were utilised for paid facility time by each trade union representative.

It is able to state that, in 2011-12, a total of 1,504 days was utilised by all TU reps in HSE at a cost of £209,295.

Remploy

Remploy does not keep individual TU representatives' records centrally and the cost of providing the information would be disproportionate.

Pensions O mbudsm an and Pension Protection Fund O mbudsman

These bodies have had a part-time elected TU rep since last summer 2011 (the rep covers both organisations). They are still in discussions about a recognition agreement with the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) and therefore facilities time etc. have not yet been agreed or recorded.

The Pension Regulator (TPR)

TPR does not keep individual TU representatives' records centrally and the cost of providing the information would be disproportionate.

The following non-departmental public bodies do not have TU reps:

Disability Living Allowance Board

Equality 2025

Industrial Injuries Advisory Council

Social Security Advisory Committee

The Pensions Advisory Service

The Pensions Regulator

National Employment Savings Trust Corporation.

Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions how many days were utilised for paid facility time by each trade union representative in (a) his Department and (b) each of its non-departmental public bodies for trade union (i) duties and (ii) activities in 2011-12. [107364]

Chris Grayling: Individual responses for my Department and its non-departmental public bodies are detailed as follows:

Department for Work and Pensions

In the Department for Work and Pensions the amount of time available for use as facility time by TU representatives is capped at 0.2% of the Department's full-time equivalent staffing level at 1 April each year.

How the facility time is utilised in respect of TU duties and TU activities is not collated centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost. The monitoring of facility time allocations is managed by local managers, who robustly manage individual reps' applications for time off under the facility time agreement.

Non-departmental public bodies

CMEC

CMEC calculates that a TU rep spent an average of 7.15 days on TU duties and 9.35 days on TU activities during the period June 2011 to 29 February 2012. (CMEC uses an accounting period from June to May).

22 May 2012 : Column 655W

Independent Living Fund (ILF)

ILF calculates that a TU rep spent an average of 61.8 days on TU duties and 25 days on TU activities in 2011-12.

Health and Safety Executive (HSE)

HSE does not hold this information.

Remploy

Remploy does not hold this information.

Pensions Ombudsman and Pension Protection Fund Ombudsman

This information is not held.

The Pension Regulator

This information is not held.

The following non-departmental public bodies do not have TU reps:

Disability Living Allowance Board

Equality 2025

Industrial Injuries Advisory Council

Social Security Advisory Committee

The Pensions Advisory Service

The Pensions Regulator

National Employment Savings Trust Corporation.

Priti Patel: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions if he will place in the Library copies of the facility time agreements between trade unions and (a) his Department and (b) each of its non-departmental public bodies. [107365]

Chris Grayling: I will place a copy of my Department's framework and those of the non-departmental public bodies which have such agreements in the Library.

Universal Credit: Foreign Workers

Mrs Moon: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, with reference to the answer of 23 April 2012, Official Report, column 653W, on foreign workers, how many new jobs are being created overseas by companies contracted to deliver the universal credit IT system; what conditions were placed on these contracts in respect of the proportion of new jobs created that must be based in the UK; and if he will make a statement. [108255]

Chris Grayling: All off-shoring work for universal credit is new development and we are not moving existing UK-based work to India.

Our IT suppliers have made certain assumptions about the majority of their future work being off-shored, not only to provide better value for money for the UK taxpayer, but to recognise that much of their skill base on key technologies resides overseas and not necessarily in the UK.

Off-shoring of work by our IT service providers is not a matter for the Department for Work and Pensions. All of our IT service providers have global delivery organisations and it is up to them (subject to security considerations) where IT development is delivered from. We are unable to quote specifics on individual IT contracts as they are commercial in confidence.

22 May 2012 : Column 656W

Welfare Reform Act 2012

Kate Green: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what recent progress he has made in preparing regulations to support the implementation of the Welfare Reform Act 2012. [108405]

Chris Grayling: The Welfare Reform Act 2012 received Royal Assent on 8 March 2012. This legislation provides for the most fundamental reforms to the social security system for 60 years. The Act introduces a wide range of reforms to make the benefits and tax credits system simpler, and fairer and ensure that work always pays.

The Department has since been developing regulations, setting out more detailed provisions, which will be published in due course.

The draft Housing Benefit (Benefit Cap) Regulations, which will allow for the introduction of a benefit cap from April 2013, as set out in sections 96 and 97 of the Welfare Reform Act, were sent to local authorities for consultation on 18 May and will be laid before Parliament in July.

Work Capability Assessment

Maria Eagle: To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what proportion of claimants of employment and support allowance in England are placed into (a) the support group, (b) the work-related activity group and (c) the fit for work group. [108020]

Chris Grayling: In England, 919,500 people have undergone an initial work capability assessment (WCA) as part of a new claim for employment and support allowance (ESA), where their claim started between October 2008 and the end of August 2011, the latest period for which data are available. Of these, 41 % were entitled to ESA, 13% were placed in the support group, and 27% were placed in the work related activity group. The remaining 59% were deemed fit for work.

The Department regularly publishes data on ESA and the WCA. The latest publication was released in April and can be found on the departmental website at the following link. Table 1a in this publication gives the affected caseload broken down by region.

http://statistics.dwp.gov.uk/asd/workingage/index.php?page=esa_wca

Notes:

1. The information above is taken from administrative data held by the Department for Work and Pensions and assessment data provided by Atos Healthcare.

2. The percentages have been rounded and so may not sum to 100%.

3. The figures above cover only new claims to ESA and exclude incapacity benefit reassessments to determine eligibility for ESA. On 20 April 2012 the Department published data on the outcomes of IB reassessment claims at the regional and local authority level at the following link:

http://research.dwp.gov.uk/asd/index.php?page=adhoc_analysis

22 May 2012 : Column 657W

Health

Alcoholic Drinks: Young People

Chris Ruane: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the answer of 16 May 2012, Official Report, columns 185-90W, on alcoholic drinks, what assessment he has made for the reasons for the decrease in average weekly alcohol consumption for 16 to 24-year-old (a) men and (b) women between 2000 and 2010. [108858]

Anne Milton: There is strong evidence that long-term trends in alcohol consumption by the United Kingdom population have followed trends in gross domestic product. It is likely that average weekly alcohol consumption by 16 to 24-year-olds is sensitive to economic trends, including employment rates in this age group. It is not possible to quantify any contribution to the consumption trend from other factors.

Cervical Cancer: Screening

Mr Spencer: To ask the Secretary of State for Health (1) what guidance his Department issues to GPs on treatment of patients aged 20 to 25 who request cervical smear tests; [108390]

(2) what his policy is on the provision by GPs of cervical smear tests to women aged between 20 and 25 who request them; [108391]

(3) whether GPs are permitted to refuse cervical smear tests for patients aged between 20 and 25 years who request them. [109105]

Paul Burstow: The NHS Cervical Screening Programme is a population-based screening programme and women aged under 25 are not invited as experts advise that screening in this age group has no impact on rates of cervical cancer and can do more harm than good. There is no clinical indication for a cervical screening test, and it is best practice that tests should not be performed on women with symptoms.

If a woman has symptoms suggestive of cervical cancer, such as unusual bleeding after sexual intercourse or in between periods, she should be managed appropriately by her general practitioner (GP), which may include referral to a gynaecologist within two weeks for further investigation. This is set out in “Clinical practice guidelines for the assessment of young women aged 20-24 with abnormal vaginal bleeding”, developed by the independent Advisory Committee on Cervical Screening and sent to all GPs in England by the Department in March 2010. The guidance has already been placed in the Library and can be found on the Department's website at:

www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publicationsandstatistics/Publications/PublicationsPolicyAndGuidance/DH_113478

Women aged under 25 who request cervical screening but do not have symptoms of the disease should be informed of what symptoms to look out for in the future and told they will receive their first invitation for cervical screening around their 25th birthday. If a GP is worried about an exceptional case in a woman aged under 25, such as a victim of child sex abuse or a former child prostitute, they are advised to contact the local screening service to arrange a screening test to be read in the laboratory if deemed clinically appropriate.

22 May 2012 : Column 658W

Chronic Fatigue Syndrome

Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what steps he is taking to increase the support available to people recently diagnosed with myalgic encephalomyelitis. [108737]

Paul Burstow: It is for the local national health service to plan and deliver services according to local need. In 2007, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) issued a clinical guideline on the management of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME). The guideline recommends the use of cognitive behaviour therapy and graded exercise in patients mildly or moderately affected by CFS/ME on the basis that these were the interventions for which there was the clearest research evidence of benefit. A number of other treatments, including particular drugs, vitamin supplements and complementary therapies, were not recommended because there was not enough evidence to suggest that they were effective. The guideline acknowledges that there is no one form of treatment to suit every patient, and that treatment and care should take into account the personal needs and preferences of the patient.

In terms of future provision, the health and social care reforms will support the improvement of outcomes for people living with CFS/ME and other neurological conditions. Improving quality and delivering better health outcomes for patients is the primary purpose of the NHS. Accountability throughout the system needs to be focused on the outcomes of care, rather than the processes. This focus on outcomes will start at a national level with the 2012-13 NHS Outcomes Framework, which defines and will enable measurement of the key outcomes that matter to patients.

All five domains within the NHS Outcomes Framework have relevance for people living with CFS/ME and other neurological conditions. Domain two—enhancing the quality of life for people with long-term conditions as a whole—is the most immediately relevant. This reflects the fact that increasing numbers of people have multiple long-term conditions, and it is not always helpful to see their care from the perspective of a single clinical pathway. Domain two seeks to capture how successfully the NHS is supporting people with long-term conditions to live as normal a life as possible and will be measured using three outcomes:

(i) feeling supported to manage their condition—this measures how well the NHS as a whole is doing in supporting people to look after themselves and handle the consequences of their conditions;

(ii) functional ability—this measures how well the person is able to live as normal a life as possible and, by looking at employment, ties in well with the Department for Work and Pensions and the Government's wider policies about getting people back to work; and

(iii) reduced time spent in hospital—this measures how successfully the NHS manages the condition(s) by looking at unnecessary hospital admissions and excessive length of stay.

It will be the responsibility of the NHS Commissioning Board to determine how to deliver the outcomes in the NHS Outcomes Framework. The board will use the Outcomes Framework and NICE Quality Standards to develop a Commissioning Outcomes Framework, and together these will be the basis for clinical commissioning groups to be held to account. The board will also

22 May 2012 : Column 659W

support commissioning by developing detailed commissioning guidance and tools such as standard contracts and tariffs.

Kerry McCarthy: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what assessment he has made of recent research into the biological causes of myalgic encephalomyelitis. [108738]

Paul Burstow: The Department has made no assessment of recent research into the biological causes of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis.

Diabetes

Mark Lancaster: To ask the Secretary of State for Health what proportion of people with diabetes are receiving all National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence recommended care processes in (a) England and (b) each primary care trust area. [108554]

Paul Burstow: The nine health care checks for diabetes recommended by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) are: HbA1c (a measurement of residual glucose), body mass index, blood pressure, urinary albumin, creatinine (a measure of kidney function), cholesterol, eye examinations, foot examinations and smoking status. NICE guidance recommends that diagnosed diabetics receive these nine health care checks (also known as care processes) annually. Primary care trusts (PCTs) are accountable for delivery of care and should be monitoring service delivery at local level.

There are two sources of data for assessing the extent to which the nine health care checks are provided: the National Diabetes Audit (NDA), and the Quality and Outcomes Framework (QOF) achievement data.

The NDA contains 81.1% of the 2.34 million people aged 17 years and over with diagnosed diabetes reported by the QOF. Results for all PCTs that submit data to the annual NDA can be accessed via the NDA dashboard on the following link:

www.ic.nhs.uk/services/national-clinical-audit-support-programme-ncasp/national-diabetes-audit/analysis-and-participation/2010-2011-analysis

Ranking of results is colour coded, enabling easy comparison of performance between PCTs.

In addition, two maps in the NHS Atlas of Variation (2011) on the following link:

www.sepho.org.uk/extras/maps/NHSatlas2011/atlas.html

are specific to delivery of the nine care processes and use data from the NDA. The Atlas shows that, depending on their PCX area, between 5.4% and 47.9% of people with Type 1 diabetes received all nine health care checks, and between 7% to 71.4% of those with Type 2 diabetes received all the nine health care checks.

The QOF achievement data show higher numbers of patients receiving each of the health care checks than does the NDA (when comparing the QOF and NDA figures for each of the tests separately). The QOF data tables for each QOF year including 2009-10 at national, strategic health authority and primary care trust levels are available at:

www.ic.nhs.uk/statistics-and-data-collections/audits-and-performance/the-quality-and-outcomes-framework/the-quality-and-outcomes-framework-2009-10

22 May 2012 : Column 660W

The differences may be ascribable to variations in scope and data assessment methodology. We intend to work with stakeholders to understand the reasons for the differences and to identify what needs to be done as a result.