| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Maginnis of Drumglass asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 18 November (WA 188), whether official motor vehicles from the government pool are being used by Sinn Fein Ministers in the Northern Ireland Assembly without official drivers being assigned; how and by whom this arrangement was authorised; whether, and to whom, the unofficial drivers have to provide reasonable proof of competence; and to whom evidence is provided for insurance and other legal purposes. [HL6507]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: The arrangements for providing ministerial cars for NI Ministers are a matter for the devolved Administration.
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: For staff at Grade A and below, the Northern Ireland Office agreed a three-year pay deal with HMT from 1 August 2006 until July 2009. The settlements were 3.6 per cent in 2007-08 and 3.54 per cent in 2008-09. In addition a non-consolidated special bonus pot is calculated as 0.4 per cent of the pay bill and the non-consolidated performance bonus pot calculated at 0.54 per cent of the pay bill in both years.
The settlements for the Senior Civil Service were 2.6 per cent in 2007-08 and 2.5 per cent in 2008-09. In addition in each year there was a non-consolidated bonus pot of 7.6 per cent in 2007-08 and of 8.6 per cent in 2008-09. This was in accordance with the Government's response to the Senior Salaries Review Body.
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by Lord Rooker on 29 September (WA 317) concerning staffing in the Northern Ireland Office, why the number employed has risen from 1,909 to 2,088 since 2005. [HL6409]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: There is nothing further I can add to the Answer given on 28 October 2008 (Official Report, col. WA 156).
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 30 October (WA 181) concerning the expenditure of the Northern Ireland Office on taxis, why the cost of taxis has risen by 121 per cent in four years. [HL6139]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: The Northern Ireland Office (NIO) keeps the cost of travel on official business under regular review. Following a review in 2007 the department adopted a policy which made greater use of taxis rather than private hire cars. While this change in policy has led to an increase in the cost of taxis, it has generated estimated whole year net savings of £150k.
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 11 November (WA 123), why the cost of taxis for the Northern Ireland Office is not recorded in a way that would make it available to the House; and [HL6358]
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 11 November (WA 123), how data concerning the cost of taxis for the Northern Ireland Office are recorded. [HL6359]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: Invoiced expenditure on pre-booked taxi journeys is recorded on the departmental finance system. Taxi journeys which are not pre-booked are reimbursed through staff expenses claims and are recorded as incidental expenditure on this system.
Information on pre-booked taxi journeys is recorded but contains personal data which would only be redacted at disproportionate cost.
Where taxi journeys are recorded as incidental expenses on staff expenses claims, the costs cannot be provided except at disproportionate cost.
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 11 November (WA 123), who approves taxi journeys in the Northern Ireland Office; and against what criteria. [HL6360]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: Taxi journeys are approved by the line manager of the officer booking the journey, and this approval is in line with the departmental travel policy which is issued to all staff.
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 11 November (WA 123), who decided that the information requested could only be provided at disproportionate cost; and what was the basis for the decision. [HL6361]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: The decision was taken by the head of the department's finance division on the basis that to provide the detailed information requested would have required staff to undertake a manual review of travel claims to identify the taxi journeys that had been processed as reimbursed travel expenditure.
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 11 November (WA 123), what instructions have been issued in the past five years to staff of the Northern Ireland Office about the use of taxis; and [HL6362]
Further to the Written Answer by the Lord President (Baroness Royall of Blaisdon) on 11 November (WA 123), what consideration the Northern Ireland Office has given to encouraging the sharing of private cars and the use of public transport. [HL6363]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: In September 2007, the Northern Ireland Office issued specific guidance to staff on the use of all forms of road transport, including taxis. This guidance directed that staff should travel by the most efficient means possible and that public transport followed by private vehicle ranked as the most economic. Only where possible public transport or a private car is not practical due to cost, timetable restrictions or security may staff use taxis. The September 2007 guidance also stated that where possible staff should share vehicles.
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by Lord Tunnicliffe on 21 July (WA 219), whether the Northern Ireland Parades Commission is covered by Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998; and, if so, how that affects the appointment of parade monitors. [HL6298]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: The Parades Commission for Northern Ireland is not designated as a public authority in accordance with Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by Lord Tunnicliffe on 21 July (WA 216) concerning equality and parity of esteem in Northern Ireland, what progress they are making using Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998. [HL6252]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: Schedule 9 to the Northern Ireland Act 1998 places a duty on the Equality Commission for Northern Ireland to keep under review the effectiveness of the duties imposed by Section 75. A review of the effectiveness of Section 75 was published by the commission in May 2007. A copy of this report has been placed in the Library of the House.
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by Lord Tunnicliffe on 21 July (WA 217) concerning the promotion of the Irish language in Northern Ireland, whether the Irish broadcasting fund operates under Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998; if so, who monitors it; and what assessment they have made of its performance to date. [HL6253]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: I am advised that the Irish Language Broadcast Fund (ILBF) is implemented by Northern Ireland Screen, which is a public authority designated for the purposes of Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.
Monitoring of the fund and assessments made of its performance are currently a matter for the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure.
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by Baroness Crawley on 21 July (WA 277) concerning political funding for Northern Ireland, whether the difference in treatment between Irish and British citizens living in the Republic of Ireland is compatible with the principle of parity of esteem specified in the Belfast agreement of 1998. [HL6407]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: There is nothing further I can add to the Answer given on 22 July 2008 (Official Report, col. WA 277).
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the Written Answer by Lord Tunnicliffe on 21 July (WA 217) concerning the ownership of former paramilitary weapons in Northern Ireland, why ownership by the Police Service of Northern Ireland is not the same as ownership by Her Majesty's Government. [HL6251]
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: To clarify, the Government are not in possession of any of the weapons handed over under the decommissioning amnesty scheme. However, the Police Service of Northern Ireland retains a number of weapons connected to ongoing investigations into both paramilitary and non-paramilitary crimes.
Lord Berkeley asked Her Majesty's Government:
Why the Olympic Delivery Authority charges £6 per tonne of spoil removed from the Stratford Olympic site by rail. [HL6225]
Lord Davies of Oldham: The ODA does not charge for the removal of spoil from the Olympic Park construction site. The charges for this are the result of a privately negotiated commercial arrangement between the rail transport providers and the contractor responsible for the removal of the material.
Lord Berkeley asked Her Majesty's Government:
How much spoil is planned to be removed from the Stratford Olympic site (a) by rail, (b) by road, and (c) by water. [HL6226]
Lord Davies of Oldham: The clearance of the Olympic Park involves the demolition of over 220 buildings and the cleaning of 1.3 million tonnes of contaminated soil with over 90 per cent of waste materials being reused or recycled.
It has always been the ODAs intention to remediate and reuse the existing soil and demolished material on the Olympic Park construction site. However, where material is unsuitable for reuse it is removed from site by rail, road or water.
The choice of transport is the responsibility of the contractor responsible for the removal of the material and is determined, in the first instance, by the location on site, the efficiency with which it can be removed, and, subject to arrangements between the contractor and the rail, road or water carrier concerned.
Lord Maginnis of Drumglass asked Her Majesty's Government:
Who issued an instruction to staff in the British Passport Office in Belfast that it was forbidden to wear a poppy in the week before Remembrance Day; and what were the circumstances of the matter. [HL6254]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord West of Spithead): No instruction was issued to staff employed by the Identity and Passport Service or by their contractors, Siemens IT Solutions and Services Ltd, in the Belfast Passport Office that it was forbidden to wear a poppy. Reports in the media about this were inaccurate.
It appears that these reports were connected to an incident in the work area of the contractor, Siemens IT Solutions and Services Ltd (SIS), which handles the receipt of passport applications and fees and creates the computer record of these. I understand that a member of its staff complained about a colleague who they believed was wearing a poppy disrespectfully. After taking advice from the Equality Commission, SIS management discussed the matter with the individuals concerned and believed that the matter was resolved at the time. At no time was the staff member told to remove her poppy.
The Identity and Passport Service policy adheres to the Equality Commission's advice on the matter of flags and emblems in the work place, and ensures that this is reflected in practice across the organisation. The commission's advice is that the wearing of poppies by individuals in the workplace, in a respectful manner and within the appropriate period, should not be something which would cause offence.
As part of the Home Office, the Identity and Passport Service (IPS) is committed to promoting equality, fairness and respect among its customers, staff and partners.
The Home Secretary and James Hall the chief executive of IPS have received assurances from the chief executive of Siemens PLC that their policy and practice mirrors that of IPS; that is, that all their employees can wear or not wear a poppy as they choose.
Lord Maginnis of Drumglass asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will review any security implications relating to first and second phase sub-contracting of administrative duties in the British Passport Office in Belfast. [HL6255]
Lord West of Spithead: Security implications relating to first and second phase sub-contracting are taken very seriously across the Identity and Passport Service, which includes the Belfast regional office. All first and second phase sub-contracted staff may only commence employment with IPS having achieved a security clearance through the Home Office Vetting Unit. Compliance with this policy is assured on a periodic basis.
Lord Roberts of Llandudno asked Her Majesty's Government:
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord West of Spithead): The total expenditure to the end of September 2008 to establish and to operate the network of passport interview offices is £117.5 million. This includes capital, project set-up costs and operational costs.
Lord Roberts of Llandudno asked Her Majesty's Government:
How many full-time and part-time staff are employed to run the passport personal interview project. [HL6374]
Lord West of Spithead: As at the end of September, IPS employed 465.86 full-time equivalent staff within the interview office network.
Lord Maginnis of Drumglass asked Her Majesty's Government:
How many police forces in the United Kingdom operate a bonus payment scheme for officers at senior command level; and what authorisation is required in each instance. [HL6256]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord West of Spithead): All police authorities in England, Wales and Northern Ireland have a chief officer bonus scheme as set out in the Police Negotiating Board (PNB) agreement of 12 February 2004. It is up to police authorities to decide how bonuses are authorised.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |