Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the comments by Baroness Scotland of Asthal on 12 June (Official Report, col. 1628), whether they have made an assessment of the impact of imprisonment on the children of convicted offenders; whether they now have accurate data on children affected in this way; and, if not, when they expect to have this information. [HL850]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord Hunt of Kings Heath): Information about the children of prisoners is not held centrally and only estimates are available. We will shortly publish the findings from a review of offenders' children carried out jointly by the Department of Children, Schools and Families and the Ministry of Justice. This review has looked at the extent to which the children of prisoners have poorer outcomes and what should be done to ensure they are effectively supported. When we have the findings of this review and the Social Exclusion Task Force's forthcoming Families At Risk publication, we will consider what additional data is needed to take this forward.
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will do more to publicise the availability of financial support for prison visits by next of kin who have limited means. [HL854]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord Hunt of Kings Heath): The assisted prison visits scheme which provides financial support to prisoners next of kin is published as a Prison Service Order 4405 providing rules of the scheme. This document is accessible on the Prison Service website for the general public to view and a downloadable information booklet is also available in
17 Dec 2007 : Column WA107
Lord Tebbit asked the Leader of the House:
Why at 6 December the Government had left unanswered 64 Written Questions due to have been answered by that date. [HL883]
The Lord President of the Council (Baroness Ashton of Upholland): My office has reminded departments of the importance of Questions for Written Answer and the need to address the number of outstanding Answers.
I will discuss this matter with ministerial colleagues and continue to ensure that Questions for Written Answer are answered accurately, wherever possible within the 14-day deadline.
Lord Sutherland of Houndwood asked Her Majesty's Government:
What financial provision has been made in forward estimates to cover the costs of raising the school leaving age to 18. [HL880]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Children, Schools and Families (Lord Adonis): The estimated costs of raising the participation age were set out in the impact assessment published alongside the Education and Skills Bill on 29 November. In total the costs of RPA over and above 90 per cent participation are around £774 million in present value terms (in 2016-17 prices). These are dominated by the direct participation costs of more young people being in education and training which are estimated to be around £583 million in a steady state. The projected costs associated with the Bill over the next three years are included within the total CSR funding. The majority of the costs for raising the participation age will occur in subsequent spending review periods and will be dealt with initially through the spending review 2009.
Lord Hanningfield asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they have assessed the impact of the toughening of the eligibility criteria for social care operated by local authorities across England on the overall level of healthcare and quality of life in the past five years; and [HL616]
What patterns have emerged in the past five years with regard to the operation of the eligibility criteria used by local authorities in England in respect of the provision of adult social care; and what are the reasons behind such trends. [HL617]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Lord Darzi of Denham): It is for individual local authorities to decide on the eligibility criteria for receiving adult social care services. Local authorities manage and direct their own resources in accordance with local priorities and the needs of the communities to which they are accountable. The department does not collect information on each council's eligibility criteria and has therefore made no assessment of patterns emerging in the past five years with regard to the operation of the eligibility criteria used by local authorities in England in respect of the provision of adult social care.
Baroness Falkner of Margravine asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Answer by Lord West of Spithead on 6 December, what organisation and individuals were consulted on the proposed pre-charge detention aspects of the Counter-Terrorism Bill; and when those consultations were held.[HL861]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord West of Spithead): This information was published on 6 December in the summary of consultation responses (Command Paper 7269). This information can be found on the Stationery Office website and the Home Office security website (www.homeoffice.security.gov.uk).
Lord Dykes asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will investigate whether the greater use of the threshold test, rather than the full code, in charging terrorist suspects can include greater use of administrative detention for short periods at home, rather than in prisons or police stations. [HL885]
Lord West of Spithead: The threshold test is already fully used in terrorist investigations. It is the test used by the Crown Prosecution Service to decide whether or not to charge a suspect pending receipt of sufficient evidence to allow the full Code for Crown Prosecutors test to be applied. The test is not relevant to any decisions taken by a judge as to whether or not a defendant is held in custody either before or after charge.
Lord Dykes asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will guarantee that any changes in the anti-terrorism pre-charge detention procedures will exclude the concept of anticipatory or precautionary justification devoid of evidential support. [HL886]
Lord West of Spithead: While an arrest may have a preventive or disruptive effect on a terrorist or network of terrorists, and while this may be the impetus for executing arrests at any point during an investigation, legislation does not allow continued detention on this basis. Once a person has been arrested, their continued detention can only be authorised on the grounds that it is necessary to obtain, examine or analyse evidence or information with the aim of obtaining evidence.
The purpose of the extended detention time is to secure sufficient admissible evidence for use in criminal proceedings. We have no plans to change this.
The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether, in 2004, the Environment Agency or the Environment Agency Wales were aware of a memorandum by the chief counsel for Monsanto of 1970 and memoranda from 1972 in which Monsanto admits shared liability with Redland Purle as to the Brofiscin site. [HL765]
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: The Environment Agency has not seen any memorandum by the chief counsel of Monsanto of 1970 or any memorandum from 1972 in which Monsanto admits shared liability in the information it has considered to date.
The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether the Environment Agency or the Environment Agency Wales were aware that Solutia Inc had informed the United States Bankruptcy Court that the presence of certain chemical contaminants found in waste disposal sites would be a proof of Monsanto involvement, and that these chemicals were identified by Komex, Celtic and Atkins in their reports on the Brofiscin site. [HL754]
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: The Environment Agency has not been advised of any filing or statement made to the United States Bankruptcy Court by Solutia Inc that the presence of certain chemical contaminants found in waste disposal sites would be a proof of Monsanto involvement.
The Countess of Mar asked Her Majesty’s Government:
On what date the Environment Agency Wales (EAW) became responsible for the prevention of pollution to groundwater, surface water and the environment in Wales; and from which organisations EAW inherited those responsibilities. [HL753]
Baroness Morgan of Drefelin: The Environment Agency was established pursuant to the provisions of the Environment Act 1995. In Wales, the Environment Agency is now an Assembly Government Sponsored Body. On 1 April 1996 it assumed functions under a wide range of environmental legislation that were previously carried out by the National Rivers Authority, HM Inspectorate of Pollution and the local authorities as waste regulatory authorities.
Lord Beaumont of Whitley asked Her Majesty's Government:
When decisions are taken on contributions to the World Bank International Development Association (IDA), what consideration is given to the decision-making process the World Bank uses to allocate funds from the IDA to recipient countries; and [HL768]
Whether consideration is given to the import placed on environmental sustainability in the World Bank's country policy and institutional assessment tool when it decides on contributions to the International Development Association. [HL769]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for International Development (Baroness Vadera): The latest replenishment of the International Development Association (IDA) is about to conclude. The UK, together with other donors, will agree the level of funding and a policy framework. During this replenishment, discussion has focused on country-level effectiveness, fragile states and IDA's role in assisting countries to tackle climate change.
We consider a number of factors in deciding funding to IDA. These factors include IDA's effectiveness in reducing poverty which in turn is linked to IDA's allocation system, known as the performance-based allocation system—PBA. Each year IDA allocates the bulk of its resources using the PBA. The PBA gives weight to both the needs and performance of all countries that are eligible to receive assistance from IDA. A country's performance is measured by the country policy and institutional assessment—CPIA. Environmental sustainability is one of 16 criteria in the CPIA.
The IDA negotiations in 2007 have (a) reaffirmed the centrality of IDA's allocation system; (b) simplified the system to make it more transparent; (c) discussed
17 Dec 2007 : Column WA111
Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer asked Her Majesty's Government:
What proportion of the cost of keeping a young person in custody is spent on education; and how this compares with the amount budgeted per pupil in the state school system. [HL465]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Children, Schools and Families (Lord Adonis): In young offender institutions, 15 per cent of the cost of keeping a young person in custody is spent on education. In secure children's homes, contractors running these establishments report it is also 15 per cent and in secure training centres it is 11 per cent. The actual spend per pupil in the secure estate in the different types of institution varies between around £8,100 and £27,700. The amount budgeted per pupil in English state schools for 2007-08 is £4,525.