27 Nov 2012 : Column WS5

27 Nov 2012 : Column WS5

Written Statements

Tuesday 27 November 2012

Correction to Commons Written Answer

Statement

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Energy and Climate Change (Baroness Verma): My honourable friend the Minister of State for Energy (John Hayes) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

An error has been identified in the Written Answer given to the honourable Member for Edinburgh West on 8 November 2012 (Official Report, col. 709-710W). The information included within the table contained some incorrect figures and these have been amended.

The full answer given was :

Michael Crockhart (Edinburgh West): To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, what the total output of electricity in Scotland was from (a) coal, (b) gas and (c) nuclear generation from 1 January to 30 June 2012. (127730)

John Hayes: The table shows the generation of electricity (GWh) by fuel type in Scotland in 2010:

Fuel TypeScotlandUK totalScotland as a percentage of the UK total

Coal

14,715

107,694

14%

Oil

1,213

4,860

25%

Gas

8,381

175,003

5%

Nuclear

16,381

70,323

23%

Thermal Renewables

299

5,358

6%

Hydro Natural Flow

3,266

3,603

91%

Hydro Pumped Storage

1,830

5,416

34%

Non-thermal renewables

3,825

8,872

43%

Total

49,908

381,129

13%

Source

:Table 2, special feature article titled ‘Electricity generation and supply figures for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England’, Energy Trends December 2011

(http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/11/stats/publications/energy-trends/3917-trends-dec-2011.pdf)

Generation statistics have been provided to answer this question because statistics on the supply of electricity are not available at this level of detail i.e. available only as a UK total.

Statistics on the generation of electricity at this level of detail are not yet available for 2011 or 2012. These will become available in an annual article “Electricity generation and supply figures for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England”, which is published in the quarterly edition of Energy Trends. The 2011 statistics will be published in the December 2012 edition at 9.30 am on Thursday 20 December 2012. The 2012 statistics will not be available until December 2013. These statistics can be accessed via the DECC website when published: http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statistics/publications/trends/trends.aspx.

27 Nov 2012 : Column WS6

The correct answer should have been:

The table shows the generation of electricity (GWh) by fuel type in Scotland in 2010:

Fuel TypeScotlandUK totalScotland as a percentage of the UK total

Coal

14,715

107,694

14%

Gas

8,381

175,003

5%

Nuclear

15,293

62,140

25%

Oil

1,213

4,860

25%

Thermal Renewables

1,387

11,916

12%

Other Thermal Sources

0

1,625

0%

Hydro Natural Flow

3,266

3,603

91%

Hydro Pumped Storage

779

3,150

25%

Non-thermal renewables

4,862

10,216

48%

Waste

14

922

2%

Total

49,910

381,129

13%

Source

:Table 2, special feature article titled ‘Electricity generation and supply figures for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England’, Energy Trends December 2011

(http://www.decc.gov.uk/assets/decc/11/stats/publications/energy-trends/3917-trends-dec-2011.pdf)

Generation statistics have been provided to answer this question because statistics on the supply of electricity are not available at this level of detail i.e. available only as a UK total.

Statistics on the generation of electricity at this level of detail are not yet available for 2011 or 2012. These will become available in an annual article “Electricity generation and supply figures for Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and England”, which is published in the quarterly edition of Energy Trends. The 2011 statistics will be published in the December 2012 edition at 9.30 am on Thursday 20 December 2012. The 2012 statistics will not be available until December 2013. These statistics can be accessed via the DECC website when published: http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statistics/publications/trends/trends.aspx.

Crime: Compensation

Statement

The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord McNally): My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Justice (Helen Grant) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

I am today announcing the implementation of a Hardship Fund of £500,000 per year which will provide relief from hardship for very low-paid workers in England and Wales who are temporarily unable to work as a result of being a victim of a crime of violence.

Victims of violent crime endure both physical and emotional suffering and, in some cases, financial hardship due to being unable to work as a result of their injuries. The Government believe it is right to focus criminal injuries compensation on victims of more

27 Nov 2012 : Column WS7

serious crime and that for victims with less serious injuries, prompt practical and emotional support is a more suitable response than relatively small amounts of compensation.

That is why the revised Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012, which also comes into force today along with the Victims of Overseas Terrorism Compensation Scheme 2012, focuses on those most seriously affected by crime. For those with minor injuries, we believe that prompt good quality services are a better response than small compensation payments.

However in some cases, even the less serious injuries result in the victim being unable to work for a temporary period and therefore require financial support. Some victims receive financial support from employers through statutory sick pay (SSP) or an equivalent employer-provided scheme. In other cases, particularly where the victim is in low-paid employment, no financial support may be available for this temporary period.

The Government believe that this latter group of victims should be given some financial support, at the same rate as SSP, over a short period to relieve them of the immediate hardship that arises from their being temporarily unable to work and that is why we have set up a Hardship Fund for these victims.

The eligibility criteria for the Hardship Fund are as follows:

that the applicant is a victim of a crime of violence, but the applicant’s injury is not one which is eligible for compensation under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012;that the applicant is in very low-paid employment and is temporarily unable to work;that the applicant is not eligible for SSP or an equivalent employer-provided scheme;that the crime has been reported to the police as soon as is reasonably practicable and the application has been received within four weeks of the date of the incident; andthat the applicant does not have an unspent criminal conviction which under the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012 would bar them from an award.

The fund will be administered by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority following referral based on an initial assessment of eligibility by Victim Support. The Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority will request confirmation from the police to ensure that the applicant does not have any criminal convictions that would bar them from an award. Once the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority has received all the relevant documentation they will aim to process applications within six working days.

Copies of the Hardship Fund policy paper, impact assessment and equality impact assessment have been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

Further guidance on the operation of the Hardship Fund is available on the Ministry of Justice website.

The revised Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme 2012 is also available online, at: http://www.justice. gov.uk/victims-and-witnesses/cica.

The Victims of Overseas Terrorism Compensation Scheme 2012 is available online, at: http://www.justice. gov.uk/victims-and-witnesses/cica/victims-of-overseas-terrorism.

27 Nov 2012 : Column WS8

Education: Funding

Statement

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools (Lord Hill of Oareford): My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education and Childcare (Elizabeth Truss) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

Today I am announcing indicative revenue funding allocations to local authorities to secure early education places for two year-olds from lower income households. This will form part of the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG) in 2013-14. I am also announcing capital funding allocations for the current financial year.

Revenue funding

The Government announced in the “Government Response to Supporting Families in the Foundation Years: Consultation on Proposed Changes to Free Early Education and Childcare Sufficiency” (May 2012), that funding for early education for two year-olds will form part of the DSG in 2013-14[1]. This reflects the fact that early education will become a statutory entitlement for around 20% (130,000) of eligible two year-olds[2] from September 2013, in the same way as it is for all three and four year-olds.

Formula details: in 2013-14 the department is allocating £525 million to local authorities and using £9 million itself to fund the new programme for early education for two year-olds. Local authority allocations have been calculated using an estimated number of eligible two year-old children likely to receive provision in each area, using free school meals (FSM) data for four to six year-olds as a proxy, and including an area cost adjustment. Each local authority’s allocation includes a notional amount for statutory places (which must be funded once the entitlement for 20% of two year-olds comes into force from September 2013) and a notional amount for trajectory building which will be used, in the main, to create non-statutory places in preparation for the entitlement for 40% of two year-olds (September 2014).

Funding rates: the result of the formula is that the department is allocating funding to local authorities at an average hourly rate of £5.09 for statutory two year-old places. This compares favourably to the Daycare Trust Cost Survey 2012 which shows average hourly childcare fees in England are £4.13 per hour for under-twos and £3.95 per hour for children aged two and over.

Local funding arrangements: research evidence is clear that high quality early education is critical to the success of the early years programme for two year-olds from lower income families. The Government expect local authorities to fund places in any settings that are rated good or outstanding by Ofsted. Our aspiration is that all eligible two year-olds are able to receive early education in good and outstanding provision.

We expect local authorities to pass all available funding to providers and not retain any centrally, and to do so using a flat rate with no supplements so that all providers receive the same rate. Stable and sustainable funding rates are vital to give providers the confidence to offer new two year-old places. We will increase transparency so that providers and parents will be able

27 Nov 2012 : Column WS9

to hold local authorities to account on the rate they are offering. For the first time, from 2013-14, local authorities will be required to submit details of the funding rates they pay providers for two, three and four year-old places to the department. This information will be published on the department’s website and will enable providers and parents to compare rates across the country, particularly between similar local authorities.

Participation funding: we see the key role of the local authority as raising awareness of the programme with parents and it is the Government’s strong intention to reward local authorities who achieve high levels of take-up by moving to participation funding. This is not possible in 2013, but we intend to do so as quickly as possible from 2015. In the interim, the department will provide funding to local authorities according to a formula, based on estimated numbers of eligible children. Local authorities will be made aware, in their allocation letters, of the intention to move towards participation-based funding for the new programme at the earliest opportunity.

Capital funding

£100 million of capital funding will be allocated in 2012-13 as a contribution to local authorities’ capital budgets. This additional funding may be used for any capital purpose, but it is intended to support implementation of early years education for two year-olds from lower-income families.

Formula details: local authority allocations have been calculated using the estimated number of eligible two year-old children in each area (using FSM data for four to six year-olds as a proxy) and including a capital specific area cost adjustment.

More details about today’s revenue and capital allocations are being sent to local authorities and will be published on the department’s website at: www.education.gov.uk. Details of today’s announcement can be found at Annex A and copies of the dedicated school grant and capital investment documents will be placed in the House Libraries.

Annex A

Accompanying documents

a table of local authority revenue and capital investment allocations; and

a technical note explaining the methodology used to calculate these allocations.

These can be found online at: www.education.gsi.gov.uk and have been placed in the House Libraries.

[1]

https://media.education.gov.uk/assets/files/pdf/g/government %20response%20proposed%20changes%20to%20free%20early%20 education%20and%20childcare%20sufficiency.pdf

[2]

Eligibility criteria for first phase of the entitlement:1) Looked after children; 2) Children who meet the FSM criteria eg from families whose income is below £16,190 and their parents are in receipt of any of the following benefits: income support; income-based job seekers' allowance; income-related employment and support allowance; support under Part VI of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999; the guarantee element of the state pension credit; or child tax credit, provided they have an annual gross income of no more than £16,190, as assessed by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs, and are not in receipt of working tax credits (except during the four-week period immediately after their employment ceases, or after they start to work fewer than 16 hours per week).

27 Nov 2012 : Column WS10

Employment: Work Programme

Statement

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Work and Pensions (Lord Freud): My honourable friend the Minister for Employment (Mark Hoban) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

The Department for Work and Pensions has today released official statistics covering the performance of the Work Programme in its first year.

The Work Programme was launched in June 2011 and is part of this Government’s welfare reform. Long-term unemployed people, or those most at risk of becoming long-term unemployed, are referred to a range of external employment support providers. These providers get the bulk of their payments based on the results they achieve. They are paid a job outcome payment only when they get a participant into long-term employment, and are then paid sustainment payments for every four weeks the participant stays in work, up to a maximum of two years. This payment-by-results format offers the taxpayer better value for money than previous schemes.

The Work Programme encourages innovative employment support as it offers providers the freedom to tailor services to each individual. Moreover, it takes into account that work programme participants are often a long way from entering the labour market by giving providers up to two years to help each participant find work.

The Government have today published ad hoc statistics covering the movement of Work Programme participants off benefits. These show 56% of participants who started on the Work Programme in June 2011 have had a break in their benefit claim, and 30% are off benefit in just over a year. In addition, ERSA—the trade body for the welfare-to-work industry—has also released figures showing over 200,000 Work Programme participants had started a job by the end of September 2012.

In addition, the Government have released official statistics which cover job outcome payments and the sustainment payments up to July 2012, and are available on the department’s website today. They show that by the end of July 2012, providers across the country had successfully claimed over 31,000 job outcomes. A tabulation tool is also available to break the figures down further by constituency.

While these figures show progress is being made, the Government are clear that there is more to be done. Each provider has a performance development plan and the department is managing them vigorously to constantly improve performance. Formal contract letters requiring improvement have been issued to those providers with the lowest performance to date. We are going to look at what can be done to get national employers better engaged with the programme; improve access to skills support for participants; enable better sharing of best practice between providers and across their supply chains; build understanding and expertise in supporting harder to help claimants; and improve data transparency.

27 Nov 2012 : Column WS11

EU: Balance of Competence Review

Statements

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Lord De Mauley): My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs has today made the following Statement.

I wish to inform the House that, further to my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs’ Oral Statement launching the review of the balance of competences in July this year and the Written Statement on the progress of the review on 23 October 2012 (Official Report, col. 46WS) the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Food Standards Agency have published their call for evidence relating to the Animal Health, Welfare and Food Safety Report. This report will cover animal health, animal welfare and food safety—including feed safety, food labelling, quality and compositional standards.

The call for evidence will be open for 12 weeks. The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Food Standards Agency will draw together the evidence and policy analysis into a first draft which will subsequently go through a process of scrutiny before publication in summer 2013.

The report will focus on the issues associated with protecting animal health, welfare and food safety, where maintaining a strong internal market while allowing sufficient national and local choice on issues such as how to deal with risk creates some challenges and tensions. A key question for this review will be whether the benefits to the UK of protecting the functioning of the internal market justify the high level of EU competence in this area.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and the Food Standards Agency will take a rigorous approach to the collection and analysis of evidence. The call for evidence sets out the scope of the report and includes a series of broad questions on which contributors are requested to focus. Interested parties are invited to provide evidence with regard to political, economic, social and technological factors. The evidence received (subject to the provisions of the Data Protection Act) will be published alongside the final report in summer 2013 and will be available on the new government website: www.gov.uk.

The departments will pursue an active engagement process, consulting widely across Parliament and its committees, the devolved Administrations, businesses and civil society in order to obtain evidence to contribute to our analysis of the issues. Our EU partners and the EU institutions will also be invited to contribute evidence to the review. As the review is to be objective and evidence-based, encouraging a wide range of interested parties to contribute will ensure a high yield of valuable information.

The resulting report will be a comprehensive, thorough and detailed analysis of what EU competence in the field of animal health and welfare and food and feed safety means for the UK. It will aid our understanding of the nature of our EU membership and will provide a constructive and serious contribution to the wider

27 Nov 2012 : Column WS12

European debate about modernising, reforming and improving the EU. The report will not produce specific policy recommendations.

I am placing this document and the call for evidence in the Libraries of both Houses. They will also be published on the Defra and FSA websites and accessible through the balance of competences review pages on the Foreign and Commonwealth Office website.

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Health (Earl Howe): Further to the Oral Statement by my right honourable friend the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs launching the review of the balance of competences on 12 July 2012 (Official Report, col. 468) and his Written Ministerial Statement on the progress of the review on 23 October 2012 (Official Report, col. 46ws) we are today publishing a call for evidence for the health report.

The health report will be completed by summer 2013 and will cover the overall application of EU competence in health. While responsibility for health policy is a matter for individual member states, the EU has an important role in various issues related to public health and healthcare. The health report is an opportunity to look at this role and to examine the evidence concerning the impact of EU competence in health on the UK’s national interest.

The call for evidence period will last for 12 weeks. The department will draw together the evidence into a first draft, which will subsequently go through a process of scrutiny before publication in summer 2013.

We will take a rigorous approach to the collection and analysis of evidence. The call for evidence sets out the scope of the report and includes a series of broad questions on which contributors are invited to focus. The evidence received (subject to the provisions of the Data Protection Act) will be published alongside the final report in summer 2013.

The department will pursue an active engagement process, consulting widely across Parliament and its committees, the health sector and the devolved Administrations in order to obtain evidence to contribute to our analysis of the issues. Our EU partners and the EU institutions will also be invited to contribute evidence to the review.

The result of the report will be a comprehensive analysis of EU competence in health and what this means for the United Kingdom. It will aid our understanding of the nature of our EU membership and it will provide a constructive and serious contribution to the wider European debate about modernising, reforming and improving the EU. The report will not produce specific policy recommendations.

Review of the Balance of Competencies: Health—Call for Evidence has been placed on the Library. It is also available at: www.dh.gov.uk/health/2012/11//eu-balance- competence-review/.

Justice: Jury Checks

Statement

The Advocate-General for Scotland (Lord Wallace of Tankerness): My right honourable friend the Attorney-General (Dominic Grieve) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

27 Nov 2012 : Column WS13

I have today published revised guidelines on jury checks and the exercise by the Crown of its right of stand by. In 1988 the defence right to challenge jurors without cause was abolished, the prosecution right to do so was, however, retained. In effect, this means that the prosecution can object to a potential juror without giving any reason. It is, however, a right which should be used only sparingly and in exceptional circumstances. It is because of the exceptional nature of this right that my predecessors have previously issued guidelines to prosecutors on its exercise and that I do so today.

The guidelines identify those classes of case in which it may be necessary to conduct checks of a juror which go beyond the investigation of criminal records. Broadly speaking, the cases in which this would be appropriate are those in which national security is involved, and part of the evidence is likely to be heard in camera; and security and terrorist cases in which a juror’s extreme beliefs could prevent a fair trial.

The checks, which are termed authorised checks, are checks which go beyond criminal records and for purposes wider than the mere discovery of previous convictions. I consider that it is in the public interest that the prosecution should continue to make use of its right to make inquiries about a jury panel with a view to exercising its right to stand by a potential juror.

The guidelines were last revised in 1989, shortly after the implementation of Section 118 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 which abolished the right of peremptory challenge. Since 1989 there have seen significant developments in the law relating to disclosure; and also changes to the structure and organisation of the police and security services. Over recent months consultations on the content of the guidelines have taken place with interested parties, these have included the Court Service, the senior judiciary, the Ministry of Justice, the police and Crown Prosecution Service. The new guidelines are intended to reflect the changes to the law since 1989 and the observations of the various organisations consulted.

The previous guidelines also included an annex, completed by the Association of Chief Police Officers, which provided guidance to police officers on the conduct of antecedent checks on potential jurors. The modern day practice of Her Majesty's Court Service when selecting jurors has now rendered the ACPO guidance otiose. Having consulted with ACPO it has been agreed that their guidance is no longer required and, accordingly, it is not included in the revised guidelines.

A copy of the revised guidelines has been placed in the Libraries of both Houses.

National DNA Ethics Group

Statement

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord Taylor of Holbeach): I am pleased to announce the publication of the fifth annual report of the National DNA Database Ethics Group on 27 November 2012. The group was established on 25 July 2007 to provide Ministers with independent ethical advice on the operation and practice of the National DNA Database (NDNAD).

27 Nov 2012 : Column WS14

I welcome the points raised in the report about information on the effectiveness of the retention regime for DNA profiles, and the consideration given in the report to a number of important issues around the ethical operation of the NDANAD.

The Ethics Group’s annual report can be viewed on the website of the independent Forensic Science Regulator and I am arranging for a copy to be placed in the House Library.

National Physical Laboratory

Statement

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (Lord Marland): My right honourable friend the Minister of State for Universities and Science (David Willetts) has today made the following Statement.

I wish to inform the House of my decision on the future operation of the National Physical Laboratory.

The National Physical Laboratory is the UK’s principal National Measurement Institute and is an international leader. It plays an important role in the provision and dissemination of measurement standards to UK trade and industry, and supplies vital innovation infrastructure to both business and academia. Its interaction with industry leads to a substantial contribution to GDP. In addition to its role underpinning the UK’s measurement infrastructure, it has a large research portfolio and has between 40 and 70 collaborations with academia at any given time.

The National Physical Laboratory has been operated since 1995 as a government-owned, contractor-operated facility by Serco Group plc through the vehicle of NPL Management Limited. The current contract comes to an end in March 2014. I have considered the options for how the laboratory should be operated in the future and have concluded that the laboratory and the Teddington site provide opportunities which would be difficult to realise under an extension of the current contract. I have therefore decided not to exercise that option.

The natural break of the contract in 2014 provides the opportunity to enhance the NPL and the Teddington site as a science and technology resource in the future.

I want to strengthen both fundamental research and engagement with business by applying measurement science to support innovation and growth. The Government’s aim is to:

bring greater expertise and intellectual flexibility to strengthen the laboratory’s science; make better use of the existing facilities by strengthening the laboratory’s links with its academic partners, through new and existing collaborations with academia and industry;encourage greater interaction with business, driven by closer integration of existing innovation infrastructure and commercial activity; andmake better use of the site at Teddington by granting partners access to our spare capacity.

The key to delivering this is to form a strategic alliance with one or more academic partners in place of the existing contract. For instance, this could be achieved through some form of joint venture between

27 Nov 2012 : Column WS15

Government and a university or applied science organisation with an interest in investment in science and technology. Such a structure would provide both the long-term commitment that partners will be looking for and the impartiality and stability that industry and international bodies value. I consider that the partners should have a clear, long-term stake in the ownership and operation of the National Physical Laboratory which would not be possible under the current arrangements which, of necessity, must be time-limited. A partnership with an academic institution would also allow for the formation of a dedicated applied science postgraduate institute.

In seeking partners, we intend to cast the net wide, including internationally, in order to attract the partners who are best suited to help us develop the Teddington site into a vibrant science, technology and innovation campus with a focus on measurement science for industry.

This will strengthen the laboratory’s relationships with industry and its manifold existing collaborations with universities. The National Physical Laboratory is a crucial UK asset and we can be proud of its continued record as one of the top three national measurement institutes in the world. I value the commitment and dedication of the National Physical Laboratory staff. Uncertainty can be unsettling but the approach we are proposing will offer some immediate certainty for staff. NPL Management Ltd will continue and will remain the employer of staff at the laboratory, although its ownership will change. But this change will not of itself affect jobs at the laboratory. Working with an academic partner I would expect, in the longer term, an increase in employment opportunities.

Roads: Speed Limits

Statement

Earl Attlee: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State (Stephen Hammond) has made the following Ministerial Statement.

The consultation paper proposes that Section 19 of the Road Safety Act 2006 is brought into effect. Section 19 allows the Secretary of State for Transport to designate other vehicle purposes as being exempt from speed limits in certain circumstances and if drivers of said vehicles complete successfully a high-speed training course. Section 19 replaces Section 87 of the Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 in relation to exemptions from speed limits for certain vehicle purposes.

The department recognises that there are certain vehicle purposes that the wider public may well consider as having a speed limit exemptions but which do not currently. These include, for example, vehicles used to carry human tissue for transplant, mountain rescue teams, bomb disposal squads and others listed in the consultation document.

27 Nov 2012 : Column WS16

Branches of the emergency services (police, fire service and ambulance service) are currently exempt from speed limits and provide appropriate training to their staff. No additional requirements will be placed on them.

The department has worked with representatives of the police, fire and rescue, NHS ambulance services, the Serious Organised Crime Agency and road safety stakeholders on the development of standards for driver training. This led to the creation of a code of practice based on the principles applied in each organisation.

The department seeks to identify the core competencies specified in the code of practice and include them in regulations. It also proposes that the Driving Standards Agency (DSA) will take responsibility for the accrediting and quality assuring training providers seeking to provide high-speed driver training courses, against the competences identified in the code of practice.

A further consideration within the consultation document is to exempt paramedics and other medical personnel from the requirements to wear seatbelts in the back of ambulances, particularly when providing emergency treatment.

Young People: Gang and Youth Violence

Statement

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Home Office (Lord Taylor of Holbeach): My right honourable friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Theresa May) has today made the following Written Ministerial Statement.

I wish to inform the House that the Ending Gang and Youth Violence Report: One Year On has been laid before Parliament today. Copies will be available in the Vote Office.

The original Ending Gang and Youth Violence report was published in November 2011. It contained a number of cross-government actions in key areas ranging from early intervention and prevention, through to actions to enable our partners to take tough enforcement action against those who refuse to leave their violent lifestyle.

The Ending Gang and Youth Violence programme which emanated from the report was designed to provide peer support to the 29 areas across the country facing the biggest challenges in relation to youth violence and gangs. The Home Office re-prioritised £10 million of its funding for 2012-13 to help these areas develop their capacity to respond effectively to their particular local issues.

The One Year On report sets out our collective achievements since November last year, both in terms of national, cross-government policy, and particular actions in local areas, facilitated or otherwise supported by our frontline ending gang and youth violence team. It also includes further government actions which will build on this success over the next year and beyond.