To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs when the climate change programme review will be published; and if she will make a statement. [16534]

We are aiming to publish the revised UK Climate Change Programme before the end of the year.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what assessment she has made of the effect of the introduction of the European emission trading scheme on the cost of UK coal; and if she will make a statement. [16536]

The cost of supplying UK coal is not directly affected by the EU Emissions Trading Scheme. Emissions trading impacts the costs of downstream industries which use coal as a primary fuel input and which are captured by the scheme. One of the most important users of coal is the electricity generation industry. The final report of an independent study by Ilex Energy Consulting in 2004 on the impact of the EU Emissions Trading Scheme on the price of electricity for consumers across Europe is available on the Department of Trade and Industry's website (www.dti.gov.uk/energy/sepn/euets.shtml)

In July 2005, IPA Energy Consulting were commissioned to conduct a study on the impact of the scheme on investment and pricing within the UK power generation sector. The final report will be published on the Department of Trade and Industry's website in due course.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if she will make a statement on UK participation in greenhouse gas emissions trading. [16841]

The UK is participating in two greenhouse gas trading schemes: the national UK Emissions Trading Scheme and the European Union Emissions Trading Scheme.

The UK Emission Trading Scheme has been running since 2002, when 32 companies bid in voluntary emissions reduction targets for a share of Government incentive money. To date, the scheme has achieved emissions reductions of over 12 million tonnes of CO₂ . The scheme has proved a valuable experience for participants, brokers, verifiers and Government ahead of EU and international trading.

The EU Emissions Trading Scheme is a cost-effective and efficient way of reducing carbon dioxide emissions. On Tuesday 24 May 2005, the UK National Allocation Plan (NAP) was published, and the UK Registry went live allowing operators to begin trading.

The total number of allowances allocated to industry is based on progress beyond our Kyoto target and towards our national goal of a 20 per cent. cut in CO₂ emissions on 1990 levels by 2010. In the first phase (2005–08), the scheme is set to help reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the UK by around 65 million tonnes carbon dioxide (around 8 per cent.) below projected emissions.

For Phase II of the EU ETS a major UK priority is to address any gaps, anomalies, or competitive distortions that may have arisen during Phase I, and to look at whether there is scope to include further carbon dioxide emissions from existing sectors. Member states share a desire to move towards greater consistency in coverage and implementation across the EU25 in the second phase, and we are working with other member states and the Commission to discuss harmonisation on a range of key issues relating to the shape and scope of the scheme.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs by how much greenhouse gas emissions have risen in each year since 1997; and if she will make a statement. [16538]

The following table shows UK emissions for the six Kyoto greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide (CO₂ ) methane (CH ₄ ), nitrous oxide (N ₂ O), the hydrofluorocarbons (MFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs) and sulphur hexafluoride (SF ₆ ), in million tonnes of carbon equivalent, for each year since 1997. The table also shows the total emissions of the basket of six gases, in million tonnes of carbon equivalent. These figures are taken from the latest UK greenhouse gas inventory.

Million tonnes of carbon equivalent

Total UK greenhouse gas emissions decreased by 5.9 percent. between 1997 and 2003, relative to 1997. The table indicates year-on-year percentage change (negative values indicate a decrease from the previous year and positive an increase from the previous year).

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for what reasons there is no exemption from registration with the Environment Agency under the Hazardous Waste Regulations for construction sites that produce less than 200kg of hazardous waste a year. [15084]

The purpose of site registration is to enable the Environment Agency to better identify those premises producing hazardous waste to facilitate the appropriate inspection of such premises as required by Article 4(1) of the Hazardous Waste Directive, and is consistent with our risk-based approach to regulation. It is recognised that some premises will in general produce only small amounts of relatively lower risk hazardous wastes such as fluorescent tubes and computer monitors, and they are exempt from the requirement to notify where they produce less than 200kg of hazardous waste per year. These premises include shops, offices, pubs, restaurants and farms as well as any establishments producing household waste. Industrial sites, including construction sites, are outside the scope of the exemption since they may produce higher risk waste such as soil contaminated by asbestos, coal tar or oil (all of which are carcinogenic). Nevertheless, there is provision for mobile service operators—such as painters and decorators—to be able to notify the site from which they operate rather than each site they visit where at each of those sites they produce less than 200kg of hazardous waste.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how the Government plans to meet the Kyoto agreement to cut carbon emissions from 1990 levels by 12.5 percent. by 2010; and if she will make a statement. [16537]

The Government set out their policy on reducing emissions of the six greenhouse gases covered under the Kyoto Protocol in its publication 'Climate Change: The UK Programme' (CM 4913) in 2000. This publication contains a set of flexible measures covering a range of different sectors—including transport, agriculture, business and households.

The UK remains on course to meet its Kyoto target of a 12.5 percent. reduction on base year levels by 2008–2012. Details of the reductions in greenhouse gas levels achieved so far, the main measures already in place and future options under consideration to achieve further reductions in greenhouse gas levels are contained in the 2004 'Review of the UK Climate Change Programme Consultation Paper' (PB 10372). A revised Climate Change Programme will be published later this year.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs pursuant to the answer of 7 April 2005, Official Report, column 1672W, on sewers and drains, when the Government intends to publish a decision paper on proposals to transfer ownership of private sewers and lateral drains from property owners to local water companies; and if she will make a statement. [16400]

The Government intends to publish a decision later this year, but does not rule out the need to consult further on the scope and form of a potential transfer.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will take steps to reduce the level of regulation on business. [16808]

Yes. Our proposals for better regulation were set out in the March 2005 Budget.

These reforms will result in year on year reductions in the administrative burdens faced by business and a more proportionate, targeted and risk-based inspection regime.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement on reports written by Lord Birt since his appointment as an adviser to the Prime Minister. [16809]

Lord Birt is the Prime Minister's unpaid Strategy Adviser. He provides the Prime Minister and other Cabinet Ministers with advice on a range of issues. He has contributed to reports in conjunction with the Strategy Unit on London, crime, health, education, transport and drugs.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will make a statement on progress in implementing the recommendations of the Better Regulation Executive report, "Less is More". [16640]

The Government published a formal response to the Better Regulation Task Force (BRTF) report "Less is More" on 18 July 2005, copies of which are available in the Library. Implementation of the recommendations in the BRTF report is on track. For example:

In response to the recommendations about making it easier to remove or amend outdated or unnecessary regulation, the Government have already set out their proposals in a consultation document, "A Bill for Better Regulation", published on 20 July 2005.

On 15 September the Cabinet Office launched a major project to measure and then reduce the amount of paperwork and administration costs that Government regulations impose on British businesses and charities. This will involve extensive interviews with businesses, charities and voluntary organisations to estimate how much it costs them to comply with Government regulations.

The BRTF also recommended that the Cabinet Office establish "by the end of 2005" a new mechanism for business and other stakeholders to submit regulatory reform proposals to Government. This was launched on 15 September. Details are available at www.betterregulation.gov.uk. Departments and agencies will have 90 working days to respond to such proposals.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster if he will list websites that come under his Department's responsibility; and what the (a) cost and (b) number of visits was for each in the last year for which figures are available. [15769]

A table listing the websites within the Department's responsibility and the costs and number of visits for each, has been placed in the Library.

A website has been determined to be a set of pages under a unique domain name for example, www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk. Costs and traffic for sub-domains and areas within a website for example, www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/regulation, are incorporated within the figures for the main site. A certain number of unique domain names, for example www.chartermark.gov.uk, are just automatic redirectors to the relevant section of another site e.g. www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/chartermark. In such cases, statistics and costs have been included within the main site.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what changes have been made to the advice for officials attending select committees since 1997. [16806]

Updated guidance for officials attending Select Committees, to take account of changes both in Government and Parliament, was published on 14 July. Copies are available in the Library.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport whether his Department has undertaken an audit of all rail stations to assess their compliance with disability discrimination legislation. [16819]

I plan to publish a Strategy for Rail Accessibility later this year. This will set out the process for allocating the £370 million "Access for All" fund to improve access to stations for disabled people over the next 10 years. Our aim is to maximise the potential for disabled people to make rail journeys.

Train operating companies have already carried out access assessments for the Strategic Rail Authority as part of preparing their Disabled Persons Protection Policies.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps he is taking to ensure that the traffic problems at the Saltaire roundabout are resolved before the road is detrunked. [16820]

The Highways Agency is in discussion with City of Bradford metropolitan district council to address concerns over detrunking the A629/A650 route.

One of the issues being considered is the congestion at Saltaire roundabout. A joint study into the issue has been agreed.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what plans the Government have to change the level of subsidy for the railway industry. [16821]

The Government's spending plans for rail until 2008–09 were set out in my statement to Parliament of 10 February.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps he is taking to improve integration of rail services between Network Rail and train operating companies. [16822]

The changes made by the Railways Act 2005 will ensure that the different parts of the industry work more effectively together—and create the conditions for Network Rail to work more closely with operators. In particular, integrated control offices are being established to improve coordination between Network Rail and operators and ensure trains run more reliably.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will assess capacity on South West trains following the relocation of 30 units by the Strategic Rail Authority to the Northampton line; and if he will make a statement. [16831]

Network Rail is currently carrying out a route utilisation strategy (RUS) on the SWT route and will be consulting shortly on their initial findings. The RUS concentrates on maximising the passenger and rolling stock capacity of the route to the available infrastructure. The RUS will feed into and help form the timetable for the re-franchising of South West Trains, targeted for 14 months time in February 2007. The franchise specification will also include the efficient deployment of rolling stock to meet capacity requirements.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on the future of the Penzance to Paddington rail sleeper service. [16828]

Bidders are required to include provision for a Paddington to Penzance sleeper in their bids for the new Greater Western franchise. To ensure value for money, however, bidders have also been asked to cost the service and propose alternative ways of serving the overnight market. A decision on the future of the sleeper will be taken in the light of the bids received.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the percentage change in real terms of the costs of travelling by (a) private car, (b) bus and (c) train has been since 1997. [16823]

Between 1997 and 2004 the real cost of motoring declined by 7 per cent., bus and coach fares increased by 11 per cent. and rail fares increased by 4 per cent.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on investment in the roads network in the south-east. [16824]

We announced in December 2004 that the south-east region will receive over £950 million over the next three years for investment in transport schemes of local and regional importance, including roads. This funding is in addition to our funding for road schemes of national importance, such as widening the M25.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement on major road schemes in Norfolk. [16825]

We announced in December 2004 a programme of major transport schemes which we propose to take forward in the East of England. These include a number of road improvement schemes that will benefit Norfolk.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent representations he has received on the funding of the Nexus Passenger Transport Executive in Tyne and Wear; and if he will make a statement. [16826]

In July, Nexus delivered to the Secretary of State their 20-year strategy for capital reinvestment in the Tyne and Wear Metro. DfT officials are considering requests by Nexus for a contribution to development costs for the strategy, for continuing revenue support for the Metro, and for the funding of a quality bus corridor scheme.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what steps the Government are taking to support small regional airports. [16827]

The White Paper "The Future of Air Transport" acknowledged the important role played by regional airports and supported their growth to serve regional and local demand. It recognised that limited public funding may be appropriate to support small airports owned by local authorities and those in Objective 1 and 2 areas, and facilitated the use of Route Development Funds to provide start-up aid for new routes from regional airports.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what assessment he has made of the likely impact of Crossrail on links between Gloucestershire and London; and if he will make a statement. [16829]

The numbers and speed of current services between Gloucestershire and London are not expected to be affected by Crossrail during normal operation. The Crossrail project includes significant upgrading of the GWML which will cause some disruption, but not out of line with major upgrading work done elsewhere on the national network.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what studies his Department has undertaken on the impact of Crossrail construction on road safety in the Spitalfields area. [15919]

The safety of road users, during both the construction and operation of Crossrail, was considered as part of the Crossrail Transport Assessment, which forms part of the Crossrail Environmental Statement published in February 2005.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what health and safety impact studies his Department has undertaken on (a) Crossrail and (b) Thameslink options. [15916]

Cross London Rail Links Limited (CLRLL) has reviewed the health and safety impacts of each element of the Crossrail design and compiled a risk register. This register lists all identified hazards during the construction, operation and maintenance phases of the project and outlines the safety measures envisaged. CLRLL is also carrying out a health impact assessment for the project, which will be published later in the year.

Responsibility for Thameslink 2000 is a matter for Network Rail. Health and safety studies were undertaken by the project team and were presented to the Thameslink 2000 public inquiry in 2000–01.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what environmental impact studies his Department has undertaken on (a) Crossrail and (b) Thameslink options. [15917]

The impacts on the environment arising from the Crossrail project are reported in the Crossrail Environmental Statement (ES) published in February 2005. Additional environmental impact information is provided in the Crossrail Supplementary ES published in May 2005.

Thameslink 2000 is a matter for Network Rail. Thameslink 2000 was subject to a full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) in 1997 and again in 1999 resulting in the production of an ES in each of those years, accompanied by the appropriate supporting documentation. A further EIA was undertaken in 2004 the results of which were documented in an ES published in June 2004 (ES2004). Additional EIA work was undertaken in 2005 to update parts of ES2004 and to assess specific potential cumulative effects of concurrent construction of Thameslink 2000 and Crossrail at Farringdon, should this occur. This later work was documented in the Thameslink 2000 ES Addendum 2005. ES2004 and the 2005 Addendum are part of the documentation informing the Thameslink 2000 public inquiry, which re-opened on 6 September 2005.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what websites come under his Department's responsibility; and what the (a) cost and (b) number of visitors to those sites was in the last year for which figures are available. [16026]

The following websites are the Department's responsibility and include the Department for Transport (DfT) website, associated DfT websites as well as DfT Agency sites. Figures are provided for the financial year 2004–05.

The 'Number of visitors' information provided refers to the number of unique users who have visited each site. This information is not provided for all sites where statistics software used does not provide such data and is listed as 'Not Available' where relevant.

n/a = not available.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what the timescale is for key decisions relating to the new South West Trains franchise in 2007. [16830]

An Official Journal of the European Union Notice was issued on 22 September inviting Expressions of Interest to run the South Western franchise; responses are due back on 11 November. Those short-listed will be announced in January 2006, and an invitation to tender issued in March 2006. Bids must be returned during June 2006, and it is expected to announce the successful bidder in autumn 2006.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much revenue was raised in taxation on charities in 2004. [16848]

Charities are exempt from tax on most income and gains provided they are applied charitably. Charities are not normally exempt from tax on income and gains derived from non-charitable activities. Tax on income and gains raised from charities in 2004–05 with respect to non-charitable activities, or funds applied to non-charitable purposes amounted to less than £10 million.

HM Revenue and Customs do not collect data on VAT from individual goods and services. A figure for revenue from VAT on charities is therefore unavailable.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what the level of tax reliefs and public subsidies in grants or loans received by each of the top 20 UK companies has been in each year since 1990; and if he will list the main tax reliefs and public subsidies concerned. [16360]

Disclosure of the tax reliefs and support for particular companies would breach taxpayer confidentiality.

However, details of the costs of the main tax reliefs can be found in table A3.1 in the Financial Statement and Budget Report 2005, and details on business support can be found in departmental reports.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what assessment has been made of the effects of Crossrail on London's economy; and if he will make a statement. [15415]

I have been asked to reply.

Information on the economic assessment of Crossrail is available on the Crossrail website at www.crossrail.co.uk

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer

(1) to how many countries he proposes to extend the Government's debt relief programme; [15416]

(2) to which poor countries the Government's current debt relief programmes apply; and how they are structured. [15323]

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much (a) bilateral and (b) multilateral (i) aid and (ii) debt relief for developing countries he has committed from UK Treasury resources since the G8 summit at Gleneagles. [15561]

The annual departmental report for the Department for International Development (DFID) sets out DFID's current spending plans and reports on outturn expenditure for previous years. Each departmental report's analysis of DFID expenditure covers: bilateral aid expenditure, including all forms of direct assistance; expenditure through multilateral institutions; DFID expenditure in support of the HIPC initiative and the multilateral debt relief initiative, for those years in which these initiatives have been in place.

Reports outline DFID's expenditure plans and do not distinguish between pledges and commitments.

DFID's departmental report was first published in 1999. The Secretary of State for International Development has arranged for copies of the report from 1999 to 2005 to be placed in the Library of the House. Information on DFID expenditure is to be found in: Annex 1, Table 5 of the 1999 and 2000 reports; Annex 2, Table 10 of the 2001 report; Annex 1, Table 4 of the 2002 to 2005 reports.

In the 2004 Spending Review, the Chancellor announced that DFID's budget would increase from £4.5 billion in 2005–06 to £5.0 billion in 2006–07 and to £5.3 billion in 2007–08. The Department has set out its expenditure plans within this framework in its departmental report 2005. For ease of reference, the Department's total planned expenditure on bilateral aid programmes and through multilateral institutions for the period 2005–06 to 2007–08 is set out in Table 1. This excludes the UK's share of the EC aid budget which is set against DFID's budget. It also excludes most UK expenditure on debt relief, although DFID's contribution to the HIPC Trust Fund is included. This is because most of our internationally agreed debt relief is provided on debts held by the Export Credits Guarantee Department (ECGD). Debt relief that goes beyond what is required by international agreements is funded by DFID. DFID's bilateral and multilateral aid expenditure plans were not changed in light of the G8 Finance Ministers summit in June.

Table 1 -- £ million

Debt relief

The Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPC) Initiative provides qualifying countries with relief and cancellation of debts owed to multilateral institutions such as the World Bank and the IMF, as well as debts to bilateral governments. To date, debt relief worth $56 billion (in nominal terms) has been agreed for 28 countries, other countries are likely to enter the Initiative next year. The World Bank and IMF estimate that the HIPC Initiative has been freeing up around $1 billion a year from debt service payments for the 28 countries that have qualified under HIPC. The UK is the second largest contributor to the HIPC Trust Fund, which assists multilateral institutions with the costs of providing debt relief under HIPC. We pledged a total of $436 million to the Trust Fund ($221 million, plus $88 million of the European Commission contribution in 2000, and a further $95 million, plus $32 million of an EC contribution in 2002). In addition, the UK also contributed US$43 million to assist the International Monetary Fund with its costs of delivering HIPC debt relief. 18 countries have qualified for Completion Point of HIPC (Benin, Bolivia, Burkina Faso, Ethiopia, Guyana, Ghana, Honduras, Mali, Mauritania, Madagascar, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Niger, Rwanda, Senegal, Tanzania, Uganda and Zambia). Another 10 have reached Decision Point (Burundi, Cameroon, Chad, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Gambia, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Malawi, Sierra Leone and Sao Tome and Principe). A further 10 are eligible for debt relief under HIPC once they meet Decision Point criterion (Central African Republic, Comoros, Congo, Cote D'Ivoire, Lao Pdr, Liberia, Myanmar, Somalia, Sudan and Togo). A final list of countries eligible for HIPC under the Sunset Clause will be released early next year.

On bilateral debt, the Government have cancelled the aid debts owed by the poorest countries (not just the HIPCs), worth some £1.2 billion since 1978.

In 1999, the Government agreed to cancel 100 per cent. of bilateral debts owed by HIPC countries to the UK when these countries completed the HIPC process. Since most aid debts had already been cancelled, these were export credit guarantee debts. For HIPC countries, total UK debt written off so far (to August 2005) is around £1.2 billion; this includes traditional Paris Club debt treatment, as well as the application of our 100 per cent. bilateral cancellation policy under the HIPC Initiative.

In 2000, the Government agreed that they would not benefit from debt service payments from HIPC countries, and that any payments received from December 2000 would be held in trust and reimbursed to the country once it had successfully completed the HIPC process.

In 2004, recognising the poorest countries were still having to curtail spending on poverty reduction in order to service their debts, the Government proposed greater relief on debts owed by countries to international institutions. The Multilateral Debt Relief Initiative (MDRI) began on 1 January 2005, under which we committed to pay our share, 10 per cent., of qualifying countries' debt service payments to International Development Association of the World Bank and the African Development Fund. We expect to spend about $46 million on qualifying countries this financial year.

In June 2005, the Finance Ministers of the G8 countries endorsed a proposal to cancel all the remaining debts of Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs) to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the International Development Association (IDA) of the World Bank and African Development Fund (AfDF). Details are still under discussion, but when agreed by the international community, the deal will be worth approximately $55 billion in debt stock cancellations for the current 38 HIPCs. Donors will provide approximately $49 billion of this over the next 40 years to IDA and AfDF to compensate for foregone reflows. The cost of debt relief at the IMF ($6.1 billion) will be financed from internal resources, although the donors have committed to provide additional resources if needed to ensure that the IMF's ability to assist poor countries is not diminished. It is estimated that the annual resources freed up by the proposal will be around $1 billion in 2007, rising to around $1.7 billion in 2010—resources that will enable countries to tackle poverty.

The G8's proposal, when agreed, will supersede the MDRI for HIPCs. The precise costs to the UK are yet to finalised, but are likely to be in the region of $6 billion over the whole period of implementation. In addition, the UK will continue to meet its obligations under the MDRI to qualifying non-HIPC countries. This will cover IDA-only, low-income countries with a sufficiently robust public financial management system, the current proxy for this being budget support from the World Bank through a Poverty Reduction Support Credit. The value of this assistance will be $184 million until 2015 for currently eligible countries (Armenia, Mongolia, Sri Lanka and Vietnam), potentially rising to $463 million until 2015 for all potentially eligible countries.

G8 Finance Ministers also reiterated in June their continued commitment to the full implementation and financing of HIPC. The UK already meets and exceeds its commitments under HIPC. Our commitment to HIPC and other bilateral debt cancellation policies continue and were not altered by the G8 Finance Ministers' decisions in June.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what measures he will be taking to ensure the implementation of the debt relief agreement concluded at the G8 Gleneagles meeting for the completion point heavily indebted poor countries without further conditionality demands from international financial institutions. [15419]

The UK welcomes the agreement at the recent annual meetings of the World Bank and IMF to the multilateral debt relief proposal. Up to 18 countries that have reached completion point of the heavily indebted poor countries (HIPC) initiative could benefit immediately, with a further 10 countries benefiting over the next year or two, and an additional 10 countries as they reach completion point. The proposal covers debt to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), International Development Association (IDA) of the World Bank and the African Development Fund (AfDF).

All countries receiving relief will have demonstrated their commitment to poverty reduction through completion of the HIPC process. Debt cancellation will be irrevocable—there will be no ongoing conditionality on support. Allocation of additional resources from IDA and the AfDF through their performance based allocation systems will maintain a performance incentive.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportion of UK Government debt was raised in sterling; what currencies the remainder was raised in; how much was raised in each; how the exchange risk is managed; and if he will make a statement. [16333]

The following table sets out the gross nominal liabilities of the national loans fund (formerly known as the national debt) broken down by currency as at 25 August 2005.

Gross nominal liabilities of the national loans fund

⁽¹⁾ Figures may not sum due to rounding

UK Government foreign currency borrowing accounts for 0.4 percent. of total borrowing. The majority of this foreign currency borrowing relates to a US dollar bond issued in June 2003. All the money raised from UK Government foreign currency borrowing is used to finance foreign currency assets held in the exchange equalisation account (EEA). Exchange rate risk is managed by either purchasing assets of the same currency as the liabilities with which they are associated or by using foreign currency swaps to match the currency exposure of the assets with the liabilities.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will publish the estimates for each quarter since Q1 1997 of (a) actual non-oil gross value added and (b) non-oil gross value added if it had grown according to trend, that underpin chart 4.1 of the Treasury publication, Evidence on the UK Economic Cycle. [16335]

The trend rate of growth assumed in the 'post-30 June revisions' line of chart 4.1 of the Treasury publication 'Evidence on the UK economic cycle' is the average rate of growth of non-oil gross value added between the estimated on-trend points in 1997H1 and 2001Q3, and the assumed rate of 2¾ percent. a year thereafter. The requested information is as follows:

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what proportion of gross salary was paid in tax for each decile of income in each year from 1979; and if he will make a statement. [10411]

The information for taxpaying employees is in the table. Information for earlier years is not readily available.

Percentage of gross salary paid in tax by each decile

Estimates are based on the Survey of Personal Incomes (SPI) and 2002–03 is the latest survey year.

The survey is based on information held by the HM Revenue and Customs tax offices on persons who are liable to UK tax.

These estimates exclude information on working families' tax credits (now replaced by working tax credit) and employees with earnings below the tax threshold—both of which enhance the progressivity of the tax system.

To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer how much tax the Government have received from the tsunami appeal (a) in total and (b) broken down by individual taxes. [16858]

Charities do not pay tax on donations they receive, but many fund-raising events for the tsunami appeal were subject to VAT.

In January the Chancellor of the Exchequer announced that the Treasury would make a special contribution to the Disasters Emergency Committee (DEC) to match the VAT collected on fund-raising events and sales. In August, having collected information on the amount of VAT raised on tsunami related fundraising events, the Treasury made a donation of £2 million to the DEC. This was in addition to the minimum of £15 million the DEC estimates has been given in tax relief on public contributions to the appeal made through the Gift Aid scheme.

Gift Aid, enables charities to reclaim the basic rate tax on donations they receive, adding 28p to every £1 donated. The donor must give the charity a declaration that they want their donation to be subject to Gift Aid.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects the Future Rapid Effects System to complete its assessment phase; and what he expects the final costs of this phase to be. [15406]

The initial assessment phase is scheduled to complete in November 2006 at an estimated cost of £113 million. As with all projects, however, completion of the assessment phase will be determined by project maturity.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many (a) FV430 series, (b) Scimitar, (c) Sultan, (d) Samson, (e) Samaritan, (f) Spartan, (g) Striker, (h) Sabre, (i) Scorpion and (j) Saxon vehicles are in working order. [10439]

I will write to the hon. Member and a copy of my letter will be placed in the Library of the House.

Substantive answer from Adam Ingram to Ann Winterton:

I undertook to write to you in response to your Parliamentary Question of 13 July 2005, Official Report, Column 1081W, about the number of Combat Vehicle Reconnaissance (Tracked) CVR(T) vehicles in working order.

As I am sure you will appreciate the number of CVR(T) vehicles available at any one time is a constant variable and depends upon a wide range of factors such as breakdowns, battle damage, availability of labour, spare parts and programmed repair activity. The table provides details about the CVR(T) fleet as at 29 April 2005. The Scorpion and Sabre variants have not been shown as these vehicles were withdrawn from service in 1995 and 2004 respectively.

Details of CVR(T) numbers as at 29 April 2005

It might be useful if I explain in a little more detail how each of the column headings has been defined for the purpose of answering your question:

Column 1—fleet size is the total number of vehicles held by the MOD.

Column 2—the quantity of vehicles held by our Land Forces is the number of vehicles that were available to LAND Command units on the date given. This equates to those in working order and those in first and second line maintenance (see below).

Column 4—this shows the number of those vehicles held locally by LAND Command units undergoing maintenance.

Column 5—is the number of vehicles in 4th line maintenance (see below).

Column 6—this figure refers to vehicles that are currently being used for training, trials and testing with the Design Authority, in Northern Ireland, the Balkans and Cyprus, with RAF Units or undergoing Bowman conversion. Unfortunately we are unable to provide more specific details for this group of vehicles as the information is not held centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

By way of background, you may wish to be aware that first and second line maintenance for our vehicle fleet is provided by the local Light Aid Detachment (LAD) and REME Battalions or by the local army base repair organisation (ABRO) district workshop. First line maintenance can range from simple tasks such as replacing a blown bulb to changing an entire engine. Tasks conducted at second line repair are generally more complicated and time consuming and may require specialist tools and facilities. Fourth line repair is provided by ABRO and is generally programmed in depth repair (base overhaul) or structural repairs such as repairs to battle damaged vehicles. Fourth line repair is the most complex and in depth repair often involving stripping the vehicle of its components and paint removal before the whole vehicle is repaired and reassembled.

It is worth noting at this point that all our vehicle fleets require regular maintenance and for this reason it is MOD policy not to have all of its vehicles available to the front line when not on operations. MOD maintenance and support policies are designed to ensure we maintain our Forces at the appropriate readiness state. Our maintenance programmes are sufficiently flexible to ensure that we can meet increased demands for vehicles from Front Line Commands to meet operational need.

I am placing a copy of this letter in the Library of the House.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what estimate he has made of the value of the Royal Navy equipment retained by the Iranian Government following the incident in the Shatt-al-Arab waterway in June 2004; and if he will make a statement. [16711]

I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Blaby (Mr. Robathan) on 21 February 2005, Official Report, column 118W.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence which of the 65 RN and RFA vessels listed in the letter from the Minister of State (Armed Forces) dated 4 July 2005 as having donated ships' fitted equipment between 1 January 2004 and 31 March 2005 are still without the donated equipment; and what the main items of equipment donated were in each case. [14491]

I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave on 17 March 2005, Official Report, column 414W, to the hon. Member for Blaby (Mr. Robathan).

Ships that donate equipment are either in upkeep or are dropping down the readiness state in preparation for going into upkeep or disposal.

During upkeep, any shortfalls in equipment are considered as part of the overall upkeep package.

To determine and track the aspects of the upkeep work package that are directly attributable to the ship being a donor of fitted equipment could be done only at disproportionate cost.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he will make a statement on the future of Whittington Barracks. [15651]

I refer my hon. Friend to the answers given to the hon. Member for Lichfield (Michael Fabricant) on 1 November 2004, Official Report, column 110W and 4 April 2005, Official Report, column 1104W. The study into the future of Army Training Regiment Lichfield and Whittington Barracks will not now be concluded until February 2006.

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales how he intends to implement Paragraph 3.12 of the White Paper, Better Government for Wales (Cm 6582), in respect of any bill he introduces in the current session of Parliament. [14951]

I have been asked to reply.

The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will be introducing a bill to defer council tax revaluation. This bill will apply only to England.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what proportion of respondents who expressed a view endorsed the proposals made in Question 21 of the consultation exercise conducted in 2004 under Part L of the Building Regulations. [13201]

The response to Question 21 is set out as follows. The majority of respondents were from the construction industry. There were very few respondents from members of the public.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many homes have been built as co-operative dwellings in (a) England and (b) Greater London in each year since 1997; and if he will make a statement. [16106]

Information is available only on Co-operative Housing Associations registered with the Housing Corporation and self build housing projects that receive funding from the Housing Corporation. The numbers of completions (including new build, acquisitions and refurbishments) by registered Co-operative Housing Associations are as tabled. The numbers of self build completions with Housing Corporation funding are shown in the second table.

Completions by registered Co-operative Housing Associations (using Approved Development Programme funding)

Completions on Self-Build housing projects (using Approved Development Programme funding)

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what assessment he has made of the likelihood of all council housing meeting the Decent Homes Standard by 2010. [16478]

Projections indicate that work completed and plans in place will take us 90 per cent. of the way towards our target to ensure that all social homes are made decent by 2010. We are now focusing our efforts on delivering decent homes for the remaining 10 per cent.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what steps the Government are taking to ensure empty homes are returned to use; and if he will make a statement; [16630]

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what his Department's policies are with regard to bringing into use vacant domestic properties in England. [16398]

The number of empty homes in England has fallen by 10 percent. since 1997, although the number remaining empty for longer than six months has remained roughly constant. We will shortly provide local authorities with new powers under the Housing Act 2004 to require owners to bring such properties back into use.

We are currently consulting on the details of the secondary legislation which will be introduced next year. Once in force, local authorities will be able—as part of their plans to tackle housing shortages locally—to serve Empty Dwelling Management Orders on owners of empty properties, enabling homes to be improved and let to those needing rented accommodation. Properties will revert to the owners after seven years, or earlier if an authority is satisfied that the owner intends to sell or let the property himself.

In some areas it may be more appropriate to demolish empty properties rather than attempt to bring them back into use, in which case local authorities can be expected to use their existing compulsory purchase powers. This is more likely to be the case in areas of low demand, but even in the nine market pathfinder areas the number of properties to be renovated is likely to exceed the number likely to be demolished by a factor of two.

We will also continue to support the work of the Empty Homes Agency in identifying and publicising best practice on bringing empty homes back into use.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many empty homes there have been in (a) the parliamentary constituency of Mid-Bedfordshire and (b) the county of Bedfordshire in each year since 1997. [16631]

Information on empty homes is available at local authority and not parliamentary constituency level. The numbers of empty homes in Bedfordshire by district by each year since 1997 are shown in the following table. These figures come from a combination of data supplied by local authorities on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister's housing strategy statistical appendix return and the Housing Corporation's regulatory and statistical return. Local authorities will shortly be able to use new powers to bring empty homes back into use.

Total vacant dwellings at 1 April by district in Bedfordshire

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what steps he is taking to improve (a) enforcement of and (b) compliance with the building regulations in relation to energy efficiency. [16528]

Amendments to the Building Regulations and new guidance from April 2006 will help builders comply with the Regulations and make it easier for local authorities to enforce compliance, while substantially increasing standards. Measures include:

a single route for demonstrating compliance

a requirement for builders to provide more information

mandatory pressure testing

improved technical guidance and checklists

a substantial dissemination and training campaign

authorised competent person self-certification schemes to reduce the burden on building control bodies and builders.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what percentage of the top 5 per cent. highest paid salaried employees within his Department are women. [15227]

Currently 39 per cent. of members of the senior civil service in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Central) are women. Of which, 1.96 per cent. of the total female population are within the top 5 per cent. highest paid salaried employees within ODPM. However, in the top 10 per cent. of the SCS, 3.9 per cent. of the total female SCS population are high earners; and in the top 15 per cent. of the SCS, 13.7 per cent. fall into this category.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what percentage of the top 5 per cent. highest paid salaried employees within his Department are from black and minority ethnic communities. [15228]

There are currently 130 members of the senior civil service in the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Central). Of which, 1.96 per cent. are from black and minority ethnic communities and within the top 5 per cent. highest paid salaried employees within ODPM.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many prosecutions for fly-posting on motorway bridges in England and Wales there have been in each of the last five years. [16602]

This information is not held centrally and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will list the locations of each development on Green Belt land for which he or his predecessors have (a) given planning permission and (b) refused planning permission, since 1 May 1997. [4289]

My right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister or his predecessors has granted planning permission to 143 called-in applications or appeals involving development on Green Belt land between 1 April 1999 and 30 September 2005. Of these, 73 were in accordance with local planning authorities' resolutions to grant permission prior to the call-in of the application by the First Secretary of State. He has also refused planning permission for a further 279 called-in applications or appeals for development on Green Belt land in the same period. Of these, 112 were in accordance with local authorities' decisions to refuse permission. Tables setting out the locations, and dates of the relevant decisions, have been made available in the Libraries of the House.

Comprehensive information is not available for the period from May 1997 to April 1999.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what percentage of (a) London and (b) Kingston and Surbiton residents (i) rent and (ii) own their dwellings. [16683]

According to the 2001 census:(a) 43 per cent. of households in London were renting and 57 per cent. of households were owner occupiers; while (b) in the Royal borough of Kingston upon Thames (which includes Surbiton), 29 per cent. of households were renting and 71 per cent. of households were owner occupiers.

Based on more recent (2005) data from the Labour Force Survey (LFS), it is estimated that, in spring 2005, 42 per cent. of London households were renting and 58 per cent. of households were owner occupiers. Recent figures for Kingston upon Thames are not available from the LFS as the survey sample is too small to provide reliable estimates at local authority level.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many people in the parliamentary constituency of Mid-Bedfordshire have been classified as homeless in each year since 1997; and if he will make a statement. [16623]

Information about local authorities' actions under homelessness legislation is collected in respect of households, rather than persons, and in terms of local housing authority district. As Mid-Bedfordshire parliamentary constituency covers parts of Bedford, Mid-Bedfordshire and South Bedfordshire district councils, summary information has been presented for all three authorities.

The number of households accepted as eligible for assistance, unintentionally homeless and in priority need for each year since 1997–98, and the number of households in temporary accommodation arranged by local authorities under homelessness legislation as at 31 March of each year since 1997, is tabled as follows.

The duty owed to a person accepted as eligible for assistance, unintentionally homeless and in priority need is to secure suitable accommodation. If a settled home is not immediately available, the authority may secure temporary accommodation until a settled home becomes available. As an alternative to the provision of temporary accommodation some authorities arrange for households to remain in their current accommodation (homeless at home), until a settled solution becomes available.

Information is also collected on the number of people who sleep rough—that is, those who are literally roofless on a single night—and these are also presented in the table.

⁽²⁾ Households eligible under homelessness legislation and found to be unintentionally homeless and in a priority need category.

⁽³⁾ ODPM P1E homelessness returns (quarterly).

⁽⁴⁾ Households in accommodation either pending a decision on their homelessness application or awaiting re-allocation of a settled home following acceptance. Excludes those households designated as "homeless at home" that have remained in their existing accommodation and have the same rights to suitable alternative accommodation as those in accommodation arranged by the authority.

⁽⁵⁾ ODPM Housing Strategy Statistical Appendix (annual). Data not collected prior to 1998.

Note:

Figures provided are for the financial year (i.e. April-March).

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what recent estimate he has made of the number of rough sleepers in the County of Bedfordshire; and if he will make a statement. [16620]

The most recent estimate, as at June 2005, showed there were 459 people sleeping rough in England on any single night. The annual rough sleeping estimate shows the result of street counts for every area where such a count has taken place and (where no counts have taken place) any estimate of more than 10 rough sleepers provided by local authorities in their 2005 Housing Strategy Statistical Appendix (HSSA) return to the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.

Local authorities in Bedfordshire had not conducted recent street counts. Bedfordshire local authorities (Bedford, Mid-Bedfordshire and South Bedfordshire) estimated rough sleeper levels of between 0–10.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister what the timetable is for the implementation of the Housing Act 2004. [15223]

I refer to the hon. Member to the written statement made on 10 October 2005, Official Report, column 6–7WS, in relation to implementation of Parts 1–4, 6 & 7 of the Housing Act 2004.

We plan to introduce mandatory home information packs under Part 5 of the Act in early 2007. However, many home buyers and sellers will not have to wait to benefit from home information packs since an increasing number of estate agents, surveyors and conveyancers are operating pack schemes on a voluntary basis.

The provisions within Part 6 of the Act, to commence s.225 (covering the preparation of accommodation needs assessment and accommodation strategies for 'Gypsies and Travellers') are planned to be commenced in spring 2006, following consultation on the definition of 'Gypsies and Travellers' for the purposes of the Act.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister when his Department last issued supplementary advice on the correct application of Minerals Planning Guidance 3 to (a) minerals planning authorities and (b) the Government Offices of the Regions; what mechanisms are available to his Department to issue supplementary advice to minerals planning authorities on the correct application of Minerals Planning Guidance 3 when considering new applications for surface coal mines; and if he will make a statement. [15970]

It is not appropriate to issue supplementary public advice that would elaborate, gloss or qualify planning policy guidance documents to give a "correct" application. There can only be one statement of policy in force at any one time, and if this is to be changed a new text must be consulted on in the usual way. Minerals Planning Guidance 3 (MPG3) already provides sufficiently clear advice to mineral planning authorities and the coal industry in England on the tests to be applied when considering coal extraction proposals.

Planning applications for coal mining have to meet alternative tests. They must either be environmentally acceptable or, even if not, provide offsetting local or community benefits. The present policy clearly sets these considerations out as alternative tests, not cumulative ones. Paragraph 8 (i) and (ii) of MPG3 is clear in that respect. Staff in our Planning Directorate drew this to the attention of ODPM decision officers, planning Inspectors and Government Office staff in October 2004. Officials in the ODPM and the relevant Government Offices, will continue to examine and comment on draft regional and local planning documents dealing with coal mining development for conformity with national policy on this and other matters dealt with in MPG3, and will if necessary raise matters of non-conformity at the public examinations of plans.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister whether the presumption against surface coal mining contained in Minerals Planning Guidance 3 only applies unless the proposal is environmentally acceptable according to the criteria set out in MPG3 or community benefits can be provided which offset environmental impact; and whether these are (a) alternative and (b) cumulative tests. [15971]

There is a presumption against open-cast mining unless the proposal is environmentally acceptable or can be made so through the use of planning conditions, but even if this is not possible community benefits that offset the likely impacts can remove that presumption and allow a successful application. The drafting of paragraph 8 (i) and (ii) of MPG3 makes it clear that these are alternative tests, not cumulative ones.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to the answer of 18 July 2005, Official Report, columns 1447–48W, on regional chambers, if he will place in the Library copies of the annual audited accounts of each regional chamber for the most recent available year. [15545]

Copies of the latest audited regional assembly accounts have been placed in the Library of the House.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister if he will make a statement on his role in ensuring delivery of the Government's sustainable communities strategy with respect to the work of the local delivery vehicles North Northants together and the West Northamptonshire urban district council. [16803]

The local delivery vehicles North Northants together and the West Northamptonshire development corporation have been established to bring together local partners in these key growth area locations to help achieve our shared goal of more sustainable growth in these areas, maximising the potential of public and private investment to that end. The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister will be providing funding and sponsorship support to enable them to bring forward projects which meet high standards of sustainability—helping to create well-designed, vibrant communities, where people want to live and work, with quality public services and infrastructure.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister how many (a) telecommunication base stations and (b) mobile phone masts have been located in (i) the parliamentary constituency of Mid-Bedfordshire and (ii) the County of Bedfordshire in each year since 1997. [16632]

The information requested is not held centrally and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

However, during September and October every year the mobile network operators write to every local authority with details of their network rollout for the year ahead.

When they write to the local authority they also provide details of their existing sites within the local authority area. The hon. Member may want to contact the network operators for copies of their plans.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister pursuant to his answer of 8 June 2005, Official Report, column 564W, on Travellers, if he will place in the Library copies of each of the written reports of the appeal decisions made by the Planning Inspectorate or the First Secretary of State for applications which were granted on appeal. [5563]

Copies of those appeal decisions made by the Planning Inspectorate or my right hon. Friend the Deputy Prime Minister the First Secretary of State, which were listed in the answer given on 8 June 2005, Official Report, column 564W, have been placed in the Libraries of the House. One decision may cover a number of appeals on a single site.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what plans he has to review section 30 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act 2003. [15882]

We have no plans to review section 30 of the Anti-social Behaviour Act. Following the High Court ruling that the police have no power to use reasonable force when taking a child home under section 30(6) of the Act, we are applying for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeal.

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what percentage of (a) paper for printed publications and (b) copying paper used by the Department in (i) 2003–04 and (ii) 2004–05 was from recycled sources; and how much post-consumer waste this paper contained. [16200]

The percentages of(a) paper for printed publications and (b) copying paper used by the department in 2003–04 and 2004–05 from recycled sources are shown in the following table.

The figure for paper for printed publications only covers the period 1 November 2004 to 31 March 2005 because until then the department did not buy their paper directly.

The post-consumer waste content of the copying paper was unknown to the supplier as it varies over time according to demand and availability of supply. The recycled content of the paper is described as unspecified.

Percentage from recycled sources

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the Department's main suppliers of (a) copier paper, (b) stationery, (c) envelopes and (d) paper for reports; and what (i) the name of each paper used and (ii) the recycled and post-consumer recycled content of each paper is. [16203]

The contract to supply paper and paper products to the Home Department is held by the company Office Depot. In addition to the aforementioned contract the prison service also hold a contract with James MacNaughton Paper Group Ltd. to supply paper and paper products to Prison Service Enterprise and Supply Services Internal Industries.

Office Depot provide a wide range of stationery products to the Home Office and to provide details of every paper and paper product supplied would incur disproportionate costs.

I am however able to provide details of the top 10 paper and paper products purchased from Office Depot by brand name and where available the recycled and post consumer recycled content of each paper in the categories requested.

Details of the top 10 paper and paper products purchased from James MacNaughton Paper Group Ltd. by brand name and where available the recycled and post consumer recycled content for copier paper is in the following table.

(a) Copier paper

⁽⁶⁾ Various pcw content depending on availability

(b) Stationery

(c) Envelopes

(d) Paper for reports

n/a=not available

James MacNaughton Paper Group Ltd paper products

To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will list the meetings at which his Department has been represented on the delivery of sustainable development across Government as co-ordinated by the Ministerial Sub-committee of Green Ministers. [16193]

Although the Government publish the title, membership and terms of reference of Cabinet Committees, it has been the practice of successive Governments not to disclose details of their proceedings.