To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster which external consultancy firms are working for 10 Downing street. (119968)

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how many external consultants were used by her Department in each year since 2005; and at what cost in each year. (122471)

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster which external consultants were used by (a) her Department and (b) each of its agencies in relation to private finance initiatives in 2005-06; and what the (i) nature and (ii) cost of the work was in each case. (123010)

For information on the cost of consultancies I refer the hon. Members to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for North-East Hertfordshire (Mr. Heald) on 16 January 2007, Official Report, column 1063W. The more detailed information requested in respect of the numbers, names and nature of the consultancies is not separately identifiable on the Department's accounting system.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster who her Department's national strategic partners are; how much funding has been allocated to each; and what the purpose is of each partnership. (123061)

The Cabinet Office has 37 National Strategic Partners, all of which are currently funded by the Office of the Third Sector. These are all organisations or partnerships who have been selected in open competition to provide an effective voice for the third sector and to enable the sector to make a much more effective contribution to the development and delivery of policy in a wide range of areas. Full details are shown in the table.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster for what reason her Department's Openness Team was renamed the FOI Team. (124346)

The FOI Team is so named to reflect the current legislative framework.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster what rules govern requests by hon. Members of the Cabinet Secretary to investigate the conduct of ministers in the light of the Ministerial Code; and what changes have been made to those rules since 1997. (124525)

Section 1 of the Ministerial Code makes clear the role of the Cabinet Secretary in relation to the investigation of Ministers. The Ministerial Code was first issued in 1997. Updated versions were issued in 2001 and 2005.

To ask the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster how much money from the public purse (a) her Department, (b) its agencies and (c) No. 10 Downing street gave to (i) the Smith Institute and (ii) its subsidiary, SI Events Limited, in each year since 1997; and for what purpose each payment was made. (123114)

The total payments by the Cabinet Office to the Smith Institute and its subsidiary, SI Events Limited amount to less than £1,000. All payments made were in relation to the purchase of publications for official use.

A further breakdown of this expenditure can be provided only at disproportionate cost.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what measures his Department is taking to aid the destruction of poppy farming in Afghanistan. (123638)

The UK is spending £270 million over three years to support the Afghan Government's National Drug Control Strategy. DFID's main role in an effective counter narcotics strategy is to promote alternative, legal livelihoods. We also provide policy advice to key ministries on how best to do this. Our Livelihoods Programme, worth nearly £150 million from 2006-09, helps support Afghan national priority programmes aimed at developing legal livelihood opportunities as alternatives to poppy farming. We seek to mainstream counter narcotics elements throughout our programme as appropriate.

DFID's support for the National Rural Access Programme (NRAP) is helping to build essential infrastructure such as irrigation schemes, roads and bridges. These provide much-needed infrastructure for economic development and jobs for Afghans at the same time. DFID gave £18 million to NRAP in 2005-06. The programme has already generated over 15 million days of labour, and nearly 9,500 km of roads have been built or repaired. Schools, health clinics and water schemes have also been constructed or repaired.

DFID is providing £17 million between 2006-09 to the National Solidarity Programme (NSP). This enables local communities to identify their own development needs through the setting up of elected Community Development Councils (CDCs). NSP has now established over 16,000 CDCs across Afghanistan, and funded over 22,000 projects in the areas of agriculture, education, health, irrigation, power supply, transport, and water supply.

Our support to the Micro-Finance Investment Support Facility of Afghanistan (MISFA) is helping Afghans to invest in income-generating activities and increase their savings. DFID is providing £20 million over three years (2006-09) to help provide small loans to the poor, who cannot otherwise get credit. So far, over £90 million of small loans has been given to over 230,000 Afghan families, tailors, shopkeepers, farmers and others to invest and increase their savings.

The UK is also contributing £30 million over three years to the UN-administered Counter Narcotics Trust Fund (CNTF) to help the Afghan Government implement various rural livelihood projects through their National Drug Control Strategy. DFID has recently agreed to provide £7 million over three years towards a World Bank programme to help farmers improve high value horticulture and livestock products in Afghanistan, with a focus on poppy growing areas.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development pursuant to the answer of 19 February 2007, Official Report, column 284W, on Afghanistan: overseas aid, whether (a) the original wells drilling programme commenced before a full water table assessment had been produced and (b) future well drilling programmes will be commenced before a further water table assessment is undertaken. (123555)

DFID included a water table assessment in its programme design and originally sourced an Italian NGO to undertake this. However, it was not completed as the NGO in question decided to stop working in Afghanistan. As Helmand is a priority for both the Government of Afghanistan and the UK Government, it was decided to continue with the drilling of wells, despite the absence of a water table assessment, because of the important benefits they can bring to the local population. We are in the advance stages of contracting DACCAR to perform an assessment and hope this will be done as soon as possible.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what progress has been made in developing the Afghan civil service; and what assistance the UK has provided for this work. (122928)

Afghanistan has made impressive progress in developing its civil service over the past five years. Successful reforms have been carried out in key ministries, including the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Reconstruction and Rural Development. Reforms have included the development of a sustainable public pay policy, recruitment of competent staff, and restructuring of ministries to make them more effective. Reform is also on track in other important ministries, including the Ministry of Education, which makes up half of the civil service.

DFID has made an important contribution to this, in particular through its £1.7 million contribution to the World Bank's Public Administration Programme. This supports the Afghan Civil Service Commission in implementing reform. A recent DFID evaluation found that good progress had been made towards the civil service reform benchmarks set out in the Afghanistan Compact: a sustainable and restructured public administration; a strengthened Civil Service Commission; and a transparent merit-based recruitment system. But challenges remain. The Civil Service Commission needs additional capacity, especially in the provinces. Merit-based recruitment systems need strengthening. And political will is needed to drive further reform through the ministries. DFID is working closely with the World Bank and Government of Afghanistan on longer-term support to address this.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development whether his Department has a gender (a) strategy and (b) equality action plan in place. (125107)

Gender is an integral part of DFID’s core business to eliminate poverty overseas. The third millennium development goal (MDG) specifically promotes gender equality and women's empowerment and evidence shows that gender equality is also key to the achievement of the other MDGs.

In line with the commitment in the Government's recent White Paper (July 2006) to give greater priority to gender equality, DFID carried out an evaluation of how effective the Department has been at achieving gender equality and women's empowerment. This led to the development of a three year gender equality action plan.

The Department is also taking the following steps to meet its specific legal responsibilities under the gender equality duty.

The Department has launched a consultation with staff and policy heads, to review UK based functions and activities to develop and publish our Gender Equality Scheme by 30 April 2007. This will conform to the approach set out in the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 (Public Authorities) (Statutory Duties) Order 2006 (No. 2930) when it comes into force on 6 April 2007.

DFID's Human Resources Division is updating gender monitoring data on our employment functions and will use this evidence to promote equality as necessary. We are now identifying other activities for which we will collect more data on gender outcomes, such as the uptake of DFID's proposed volunteering scheme and the use of the development awareness fund.

A network of gender champions has been established across the Department, consisting of senior civil servants, who are responsible for promoting equality and ensuring the Department's action plans are implemented.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what estimate he has made of the cost to his Department of monitoring the time spent processing requests for information under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 for the purposes of the proposed fees regulations. (121729)

I refer my hon. Friend to the response given by my hon. and learned Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs (Vera Baird) on 22 February 2007, Official Report, column 866W.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of the Education Fast Track Initiative; and if he will make a statement. (124130)

DFID is one partner among others on the multi-donor Education for All (EFA)—Fast Track Initiative (FTI). In its capacity as the host to the EFA-FTI, the World Bank recently carried out a study on the effectiveness of FTI on behalf of all FTI Partners. The Progress Report, with which DFID broadly agreed, states that the FTI has made significant impact on the ground; led to increases in enrolment in some FTI endorsed countries and substantial progress has been made on donor harmonisation and coordination.

Since its inception in 2002, 29 countries have been endorsed and FTI has helped in building in-country processes; targeting countries with limited external assistance and is developing a potential strategy for harnessing and mobilising long-term predictable financing. FTI has acted as a catalyst in resource mobilisation alongside increased bilateral allocations to basic education in ‘FTI endorsed’ countries. Additionally, a recent World Bank funded study on the effectiveness of Global Funds/Partnerships at country level to the Development Assistance Committee of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (DAC-OECD), found FTI to be a good model for aid effectiveness based on the Paris Principles.

The FTI Progress Report is available on the FTI website and more information about the FTI can be found at:

http://www.fasttrackinitiative.org/

Last year, DFID increased its support for the FTI Catalytic Fund from £50 million to £150 million.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what steps his Department is taking to tackle the trafficking of people from the developing world to the UK. (124401)

Poverty and social exclusion make people vulnerable to human trafficking. DFID's purpose is to support long-term development programmes to help eliminate the underlying causes of poverty. Our programmes help improve the education of children and the livelihood opportunities and security of poor people so that they are less susceptible to traffickers.

The UK spent £5.9 billion in 2006, on reducing poverty in developing countries, working with governments, civil society and the private sector. The UK also works with multilateral organisations, including the International Labour Organisation, the leading international body supporting programmes to tackle trafficking and other forms of forced labour.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development pursuant to the answer of 31 January 2007, Official Report, column 310W, on Iraq, whether the Government have taken part in discussions on the possibility of support to the Governments of Syria and Jordan for the assistance of displaced refugees from Iraq. (123953)

I refer the right hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave on 28 February 2007, Official Report, column 1337W.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment he has made of the comparative performance of his Department’s Andean Unit and its offices elsewhere in the world. (124343)

DFID’s Andean Unit was recently evaluated as part of a broader independent evaluation, undertaken by the Overseas Development Institute, of DFID’s Regional Assistance Programme for Latin America. The evaluation found that DFID Andes had adapted well to the new demands of a regional rather than a national bilateral programme, and had been successful in forging strong partnerships and implementing high quality programmes.

The evaluation stated that DFID Andes was perceived by its partners to be playing its role as catalyst of change effectively. It went on to note that DFID Andes, and its counterpart offices in other parts of Latin America, are having a positive impact on its main partners, the World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank. Both institutions have cited that DFID Andes’ influence has enabled them to improve their consultation processes on strategies and programmes, and to better disseminate their analysis to broader society.

The evaluation concluded that DFID staff in the Latin America offices are “universally considered to be excellent”, and their technical contributions are highly valued by partners.

It is hard to compare performance with DFID offices elsewhere, because the Latin American offices have a different task—to work with the World Bank and the Inter-American Development Bank, rather than to administer a DFID country programme. DFID’s Evaluation Department routinely undertakes evaluations of DFID offices and programmes around the world. Recent evaluations include DFID programmes in Bangladesh and the Caribbean. These evaluation reports are all publicly available on DFID’s website, as is the Latin America Programme independent evaluation.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development what assessment he has made of the short-term threat to the livestock of those refugees from Darfur who have crossed the border into Chad; and what plans the refugee agencies have for providing veterinary and other care to that livestock. (124491)

The major influx of Darfuri refugees with livestock into Chad took place in 2004 and 2005. During this time, livestock suffered greatly with the long distances travelled, the sudden increase in stress on pastures and the lack of available water. Since this influx, UNHCR, with its implementing partners, have stabilised the livestock situation in and around the 12 refugee camps in eastern Chad. UNHCR estimate that there are approximately 60,000 animals owned by refugees in these areas and provides the owners with training sessions on animal breeding techniques as well as vaccination and treatment services and complementary livestock feeding in the dry season.

One outstanding difficulty is the deterioration of security and looting of livestock in recent months which is again hampering movement and increasing pressure on the local environment.

UNHCR has two main priority areas for livestock for 2007; vaccination and veterinarian care in and outside the camps, in cooperation with the Chadian Government's livestock delegation; and promoting the breeding of smaller animals (sheep and poultry) better suited to vulnerable refugees living in camps.

To ask the Secretary of State for International Development if he will facilitate those agencies with expertise in dealing with livestock in emergency situations to intervene in Darfur in order to protect these assets. (124492)

The UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) is the primary agency dealing with livestock in Darfur. In 2006, FAO vaccinated and treated over 470,000 head of livestock, as well as training 350 community animal health workers, across Darfur.

DFID channels the majority of its humanitarian funding through multi-donor common humanitarian fund (CHF) which enables the UN Humanitarian Coordinator to target resources at the areas of greatest need. In 2006, the CHF allocated $6 million to the food security and livelihoods sector in Darfur from which the FAO received $3.96 million. In 2007, food security and livelihoods in Darfur has so far received $7 million, $3.4 million going to FAO. DFID’s proportion of CHF contributions stood at around two thirds in 2006 and will probably be similar in 2007.

DFID also funds two NGO programmes with a livestock component in the rural areas of Darfur. These programmes have focused on animal vaccination, treatment and the expansion of local veterinary services.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how much money the Aggregates Levy Fund generated in each year of its existence. (125005)

I have been asked to reply.

The aggregates levy was introduced in 2002 to ensure that the external costs associated with the exploitation of aggregates are reflected in the price of aggregate, and to encourage the use of recycled aggregate. The revenue raised by the levy is shown in the following table and is published on the UK Trade Info website at

http://www.uktradeinfo.com/index.cfm?task=statindex

Revenue is recycled back to business, primarily through a 0.1 percentage point reduction in employers' national insurance contributions, introduced at the same time as the levy, and the Aggregates Levy Sustainability Fund, which has been set at a UK level of £35 million since the introduction of the levy.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the time period was between the first contact with his Department of the veterinary surgeon who discovered the avian influenza outbreak at the Bernard Matthews plant at Holton and his Department’s first subsequent visit to the plant. (124326)

The State Veterinary Service (SVS) were first notified by the private veterinary surgeon by telephone at approximately 4.45 pm on 1 February. Restrictions were immediately put in place on the turkey rearing farm, and work started shortly thereafter on gathering the essential initial epidemiological information. Detailed discussions on the situation between the private veterinary surgeon and the SVS continued into that evening, including an agreement that a full veterinary clinical and epidemiological investigation would commence at the turkey rearing site at 8.45 am on 2 February.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the scientific evidence is that avian influenza can survive in birds for longer than six hours. (124985)

Although there has been some research into avian influenza virus survivability, most of this relates to the survival of virus in the environment. Therefore, we cannot give a definite answer as to how long the virus can remain in bird carcasses. Much depends upon the strain of virus, the host and environmental factors.

However, there is evidence to support the fact that avian influenza virus can survive longer than six hours in live birds. The incubation period for this disease (infection to the onset of illness) is typically three to five days and the virus can be isolated during the clinical phase of the disease. In some instances it may be longer.

Some species of birds (for example, waterfowl) can become infected but not show clinical signs of the disease, even when infected with the highly pathogenic strains. Many species of bird can become infected with the low pathogenic strains and show little evidence of being ill but are still infectious to other birds for some time.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs if he will introduce a system of fines for the production of excess packaging. (124451)

A system already exists to fine businesses for using excess packaging. The Packaging (Essential Requirements) Regulations 2003 (as amended) require that all packaging placed on the market in the UK should be manufactured so that volume and weight are limited to the minimum adequate amount to maintain necessary levels of safety, hygiene and consumer acceptance for the packed product.

These regulations are enforced by Trading Standards officers and a number of companies have already been prosecuted for using excess packaging.

The Producer Responsibility Obligations (Packaging Waste) Regulations 2007 also encourage businesses to reduce the amount of packaging they use. In addition, the Government are encouraging supermarkets to take greater responsibility for the waste they place on the market and for producers to reduce their waste. The Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP) is currently working with retailers through the ‘Courtauld Commitment’, a voluntary agreement which aims to halt packaging growth by 2008 and make absolute reductions in packaging waste by 2010. 13 major retailers, representing 92 per cent. of the UK grocery sector, have already signed the agreement as well as three major brands.

In addition, DEFRA, working with WRAP and the devolved Administrations, has recently secured the agreement of UK retailers to reduce the overall environmental impact of their carrier bags by 25 per cent. by the end of 2008.

Consumers also have a part to play in encouraging producers to reduce unnecessary waste by choosing goods that are not heavily packaged, buying ‘loose’ rather than pre-packaged food and re-using their own bags.

To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (1) whether local authorities which have entered a joint waste authority (JWA) will be able to leave the JWA without the consent of its other members; (124421)

The Government tabled their proposals for the creation of joint waste authorities (JWAs) through amendments to the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill on 1 March this year.

Under the proposals, the decision to create a JWA will be a voluntary one to be taken by two or more local waste authorities. The Secretary of State will only be able to dissolve a JWA in two situations: (i) if he/she receives a request to do so from all the appropriate local authorities; (ii) if he/she considers it necessary. Other models of partnership working are available for those authorities that do not wish their partnership to be placed on a statutory footing.

Where a JWA takes on the waste collection or waste disposal functions of its constituent authorities, it will also be responsible for any targets associated with those functions. It is up to groups of authorities to decide which functions a JWA should take on. If a JWA is responsible for waste collection, the recycling targets of the constituent authorities will in effect be “pooled”. However, if the JWA is responsible only for waste disposal, the local authorities will remain responsible for recycling targets.

It will be for the relevant local authorities to consider and propose arrangements concerned with governance, internal voting, remuneration and administration. The Government are proposing that the Secretary of State will have powers to make regulations on the content of proposals and the information that should accompany them. A requirement for local authorities to consult on their draft proposals is also being proposed.

To ask the Solicitor-General what assessment he has made of how effective the Crown Prosecution Service has been in securing compensation for victims in (a) England and Wales and (b) Northamptonshire. (124505)

Crown prosecutors are required to ensure when reviewing a case that it includes the information required to make an informed application for compensation or restitution at the court hearing. There are no figures available for the percentage of applications for compensation made by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to the court that are successful. The CPS provides any information required by the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority or the Criminal Injuries Compensation Panel within 60 days of receiving the request.

To ask the Solicitor-General whether the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is responsible for telling victims of crime if charges are not brought against suspects; and in what proportion of cases he estimates this is done by (a) the CPS and (b) the police. (123785)

Where a crown prosecutor takes the decision that there is insufficient evidence to bring proceedings, following receipt of a file of evidence, it is the responsibility of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to notify the victim of this as required by the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime. Where the decision is taken not to proceed during a consultation between the investigating officer and a crown prosecutor, it is the responsibility of the police to notify the victim of the decision not to proceed. In 2006, the CPS made the decision not to bring any proceedings against 208,116 suspects, of which 52,420 were communicated to the investigating officer through a written advice. No data are currently retained on the proportion of cases in which it is the CPS's responsibility to communicate the decision to the victim.

To ask the Solicitor-General under what circumstances the Crown Prosecution Service would prosecute a youth who is alleged to be writing graffiti tags on property. (124404)

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) would apply the two stage test as set out in the Code for Crown Prosecutors. The first stage is the evidential test: there has to be sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of conviction.

If there is, consideration has to be given to the second test, namely, whether a prosecution is required in the public interest. Relevant public interest considerations are set out in the code. A prosecution will be brought if the balance of public interest factors is in favour of a prosecution. If the youth has admitted the offence when interviewed, consideration will be given as to whether the case is suitable for diversion: in such cases, the option would be for the police to administer a reprimand or final warning.

To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission what the (a) initial budget price, (b) contract sum, (c) final cost and (d) contract period was of each of the House's building and refurbishment projects with a contract value greater than £20,000 completed since January 2001; what the final time to complete the project was in each case; what the contingency sum in the contract was in each case; in how many cases an extension of time was granted to complete the contract; what total extension of time was granted in each such case; which preliminary costs were paid on the extension of time granted; on what period of time contractors paid liabilities in each case; and what the sum was of these liabilities in each case. (112081)

I regret that information to this level of detail cannot be readily produced but if my hon. Friend wished to table a more specific question about a particular project I shall endeavour to give him a full reply.

To ask the hon. Member for North Devon, representing the House of Commons Commission what estimate he has made of the carbon footprint of the House estate; and what targets have been set to reduce it. (124508)

The amount of carbon being released into the atmosphere as a result of gas and electricity consumption on the parliamentary estate during 2005-06 was 4.746 MtC/year. This figure was calculated from the energy invoices and a deduction was made for the 10 per cent. of electricity consumption that derived from renewable sources.

The carbon emissions resulting from transportation have not been calculated so the direct/primary carbon footprint cannot be determined. The indirect/secondary carbon footprint cannot yet be determined either.

The current energy and water saving policy for the parliamentary estate has the target,

“to reduce annual absolute carbon emission, from fuel and electricity used in buildings, by 12.5 per cent. by 2010-11, relative to 1999-2000”.

The House of Commons Board of Management has approved the recommendation that the eco-management and audit scheme, an environmental management system, be implemented on the parliamentary estate and this work should start soon. Consultants have produced proposals for utilising renewable energy systems on the parliamentary estate and these are currently being considered.

26. To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners what recent discussions the Commissioners have had with Ministers on funding for church repairs. (124556)

The Church Heritage Forum, of which the Commissioners are members, continues to press Ministers and officials at all levels of Government in an effort to secure a 50:50 partnership with the state in respect of funding church repairs and a ‘level playing field’ in terms of access to other funds.

29. To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners how much (a) Lottery and (b) state funding has been spent on church buildings in the last 10 years. (124559)

The English Heritage and Heritage Lottery Fund Joint Grant Scheme for Repairs to Places of Worship began in 1996 and under this scheme a total of just under £250 million has been granted for repairs to buildings still in use as places of worship. Since 2001, a further £55 million has come from the Listed Places of Worship Grants Scheme which refunds VAT spent on repairs.

30. To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners how many churches are in the ownership of the Church of England. (124560)

The Church of England has 16,200 church buildings. About 12,200 of these are listed by the Government as being of special architectural or historic interest, including around 45 per cent. of all Grade I and 20 per cent. of all Grade 2 buildings.

To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners what assessment the Commissioners have made of the financial implications of the sexual orientation regulations for the Church of England in relation to the support of parish ministry in areas of need. (124798)

No such assessment has been made.

To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners what assessment the Commissioners have made of the effect of the financial position of the Church of England's pension fund on the activity of the Church. (124608)

The Church is carrying out a major review of its clergy pension provision in the light of the increased cost of the current scheme and the potential impact on its other mission activities. Two reports were published in 2006, the second of which identified a number of options on which we have consulted extensively.

On 27 February, proposals were put to General Synod for the retention of the existing defined benefit structure but with some modifications to scheme benefits to make them more affordable for the parishes. Synod approved the necessary changes to the scheme rules subject to our carrying out the statutory consultation with individual scheme members. Proposals will be put to the Synod for final approval at its sessions in July 2007.

To ask the hon. Member for Middlesbrough, representing the Church Commissioners what databases are controlled by the Commissioners; and what percentage of the data in each database he estimates is inaccurate or out of date. (124050)

The Commissioners maintain a large number of databases for internal use and listing these would involve a disproportionate amount of time and cost. However, I can tell the hon. Gentleman that their accuracy is constantly verified during data input.

Among the more significant databases controlled by the Commissioners are the clergy payroll, lists of redundant churches, and details of bishops' expenditure. In all cases there are robust processes for ensuring accuracy, data is updated and checked against external sources where possible, and we estimate a high percentage of accuracy.

28. To ask the hon. Member for Gosport, representing the Speaker’s Committee on the Electoral Commission what the time scale is for the assumption of responsibility by the Electoral Commission of the work of the parliamentary boundary commissions. (124558)

The Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 makes provision for the transfer of the responsibilities of the four parliamentary boundary commissions to the Electoral Commission. On 22 May 2006, Official Report, column 1472W, the Under-Secretary of State for Constitutional Affairs the hon. Member for Lewisham, East (Bridget Prentice) stated that the Government wished to take into account the findings of the review of the Electoral Commission by the Committee on Standards in Public Life before reaching a decision on the timing of any such transfers. That Committee reported in January and has recommended that the relevant statutory provisions should be repealed. The Government have yet to respond formally to this report.

To ask the Secretary of State for Transport what recent steps his Department has taken to combat the threat of terrorism on rail services in England and Wales. (124902)

It would be inappropriate to discuss the detail of any current or future counter-terrorist security measures on public transport to avoid potentially compromising their effectiveness.

In its role as the transport industries' security regulator, DfT maintains risk-driven protective security regimes based on assessments of the terrorist threat prepared by the Security Service.

Despite the practical limitations of deploying protective security measures on ‘open’ mass transit systems, a hierarchy of measures is in place to mitigate the risk of terrorist attack on the UK rail network and London Underground. These are designed to be commensurate with the risk, effective, practicable and sustainable. They are co-ordinated with the work of the British Transport Police.

The situation is kept under constant review to ensure that the measures remain up to date and we continue to look at what further practical measures can be taken to protect transport targets.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 30 November 2006, Official Report, column 435W, on Afghanistan, whether he is now in a position to make a statement on the bombing of civilians by NATO planes in Panjwayi near Khandahar in Afghanistan; and if he will make a statement. (112282)

A joint ISAF-Afghan National Army report on the airstrike in Panjwayi concluded that this incident occurred principally due to slow communications between International Forces and the local authorities. As a result, ISAF has implemented a range of measures to improve the flow of critical information. ISAF takes every step possible to prevent civilian casualties. NATO is withholding publication of further details as the information would, or would be likely to prejudice the capability, effectiveness or security of our armed forces.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what his Department’s assessment is of the security risk presented by the revival of the Taliban in Afghanistan. (123639)

We assess that the Taliban retain the capability and the intent to attack the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), Afghan security forces, aid workers and civilian targets across a broad area of southern and eastern Afghanistan. ISAF forces keep the threat posed by the Taliban and insurgent groups under constant review. The uplift in forces announced recently is aimed at defeating this Taliban capability and consolidating the excellent work carried out by ISAF to date.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how many British servicemen and women have been injured in Afghanistan since (a) special forces were deployed in 2001 and (b) the armed forces were deployed in 2002. (123640)

Casualty data for operations in Afghanistan since 1 January 2006 are available on the MOD website at http://www.mod.uk/DefenceInternet/FactSheets/OperationsFactsheets. We intend to provide further information on casualties in Afghanistan prior to 2006 on the MOD website later this month. Our initial priority is to publish information for seriously injured (SI) and very seriously injured (VSI) casualties, with further information to be released in due course. I will write to my hon. Friend when this exercise has been completed. It is MOD policy not to comment on special forces matters.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what services are offered by his Department for the bereaved families of armed forces personnel. (121890)

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave on 27 February 2007, Official Report, column 1161W, to the hon. Member for Lancaster and Wyre (Mr. Wallace).

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the daily budget allowance for meals is for (a) Royal Navy personnel (i) in port and (ii) at sea (A) on ship and (B) on submarines (1) on operations and (2) on exercise, (b) Royal Air Force personnel (x) at their home base and (y) on operations and (c) Army personnel (X) in their home posting, (Y) on exercise and (Z) on operations; and if he will make a statement. (124293)

[holding answer 1 March 2007]: The daily budget allowance, known as the daily messing rate (DMR), is based on a “basket” of food items, and is calculated on a monthly basis by applying prices obtained from the MOD's food supply contractor to the appropriate ration scale. Current DMRs are shown as follows:

Royal Navy Personnel

The DMR for Royal Navy personnel in port is currently £1.51 (unless on duty watch, when ‘at sea rates’ apply).

The minimum DMR for HM Ships at sea from January to March 2007 is £1.68 per person per day. The DMR is adjusted according to ship's complement, which can raise the total to a maximum of £2.63 per person per day.

The rate for submarines at sea is 37p higher than the ship's rates above, plus a 12 per cent. addition to the relevant DMR when away from base port for more than 24 hours. There are no additions for RN personnel during operations or exercises.

Royal Air Force personnel

DMR at home bases is £1.51.

DMR on operations is £2.49 for OP TELIC and OP HERRICK and £2.63 for OP OCCULUS (Balkans).

Army personnel

DMR in their home posting is £1.51.

DMR on exercise is £2.11.

DMR on operations is £2.49 for OP TELIC and OP HERRICK and £2.63 for OP OCCULUS.

The changeover of food supply contractor on 1 October 2006 resulted in a change in the method of calculating the DMR. Under the previous contractor, the rate included an element for their management fee, while under the current contract, that fee is paid centrally. The effect is that the DMR now appears lower, but it still purchases the same quantity and quality of food product.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the daily budget allowance for food is for military dogs in the (a) Army, (b) Royal Air Force, (c) Royal Navy and (d) Ministry of Defence Police. (124294)

[holding answer 1 March 2007]: The information requested is not held centrally and would vary depending on the breed and work of the dog.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence when he expects to announce details of the UK's involvement in the American ballistic missile defence shield. (124678)

The UK already makes a valuable contribution to the US missile defence system through the upgrade of the radar at RAF Fylingdales and our well-established technical cooperation programmes. There is no set timetable for any decisions on further participation in that programme.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what discussions he has had with his (a) United States, (b) Chinese, (c) Russian and (d) Israeli counterparts on the outcome of the Oslo conference on cluster munitions; what the outcome was of those discussions; and if he will make a statement. (124542)

No such discussions have taken place with Chinese, Russian or Israeli counterparts. United States officials have been debriefed at official level on the outcome of the conference.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) pursuant to the Spring Supplementary Estimates 2006-07 (HC294), if he will break down the (a) current and (b) revised request for resources one, two and three provision for each subhead by (i) near cash Departmental Expenditure Limit (DEL), (ii) non-cash DEL and (iii) capital DEL; (124456)

The current and revised request for resources one, two and three provision for each subhead by (i) near cash Departmental Expenditure Limit (DEL), (ii) non-cash DEL, (iii) capital DEL, (iv) near cash annual managed expenditure, (v) non-cash annual managed expenditure, (vi) capital annual managed expenditure, (vii) near cash non-budget and (viii) non-cash non-budget are set out in the following table:

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what date (a) Ministers and (b) officials in his Department were first informed that a video tape existed of the United States aerial attack which killed Lance-Corporal Hull. (122369)

[holding answer 26 February 2007]: I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer given on 20 February 2007, Official Report, column 370W. The handling of the audio/video recording in question is being investigated. I will write to the hon. Gentleman when the investigation is complete and place a copy of the letter in the Library of the House.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence (1) what estimate his Department has made of the number of servicemen (a) killed and (b) injured in Iraq by weapons of Iranian origin since the occupation of Iraq began; (122085)

The Ministry of Defence does not have an estimate of the number of British servicemen, or other servicemen, who have been killed or injured by weapons of Iranian origin since the beginning of Operation Telic. However, support from within Iran, including by the Quds Force, does go to groups who are attacking coalition forces and fuelling the sectarian violence in Iraq. In our assessment some of the Improvised Explosive Devices that are being used against our troops use technology that originates from Iran.

The Government of Iraq have made it clear that they will not tolerate Iranian activity that undermines the prospects for a secure, stable and democratic Iraq.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence how much his Department has spent on the provision of security services by private contractors in Iraq; and what proportion of his Department’s spending in that country such expenditure represents. (123698)

For the purposes of this response I have taken the phrase ‘security services’ to mean force protection services. The Ministry of Defence has not incurred any expenditure on the provision of such services by private contractors in Iraq.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what action his Department is taking to protect the employment rights of the locally engaged Gibraltarian workforce at the dockyard. (123742)

The Ministry of Defence does not employ any locally engaged personnel in the dockyard at Gibraltar.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to introduce missile-to-missile defences in the United Kingdom in 2007 to 2012. (124310)

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answer I gave on 26 February 2007, Official Report, column 601, to the hon. Member for Scarborough and Whitby (Mr. Goodwill).

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 19 February 2007, Official Report, column 312W, on NATO, what assessment he has made of progress in the continuing transformation of NATO's capabilities. (124529)

NATO’s ongoing transformation process is vital for ensuring that the alliance has the modern expeditionary capabilities it needs to undertake the full range of potential missions, including collective defence and crisis response operations. Building on the decisions taken at the Prague and Istanbul summits, much progress has already been made to make alliance forces more capable and more usable—exemplified by the development of the NATO Response Force, which was declared fully operational at the Riga summit last November. Other important new initiatives agreed at Riga were to increase the strategic lift available to allies; enhance co-operation between special forces; improve logistics support; develop a more comprehensive approach to operations; further streamline NATO’s command structures; and strengthen NATO’s ability to work with those current and potential contributors to NATO operations and missions, who share its interests and values.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 29 January 2007, Official Report, column 690W, on naval deployment (Gulf), what changes were made to the UK naval posture in the Gulf region between July 2006 and February 2007. (124851)

There have been a number of changes in the UK Naval presence in the Gulf since July 2006. These have all been part of long-term plans and routine rotations. The naval posture has not changed during this period.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence whether the costs of building a new uranium processing facility, warhead assembly and disassembly facility, core punch facility, explosives handling facility and material science facilities at the Atomic Weapons Establishment are included in the estimates for (a) the procurement costs in paragraph 5-12 and (b) the in-service costs in paragraph 5-14 of the White Paper, “The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent”. (124011)

These facilities are part of the programme of investment in sustaining capabilities at the Atomic Weapons Establishment, both to ensure we can maintain the existing warhead for as long as necessary and to enable us to develop a replacement warhead if that is required. The costs of building, and subsequently operating and maintaining, these facilities are included in the estimates set out in paragraphs 5-13 and 5-14 of the White Paper: “The Future of the United Kingdom's Nuclear Deterrent” (Cm 6994).

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence what the process is for the management and control of classified information; and which Minister is responsible for classified information. (120318)

The process for controlling and managing classified information is as follows:

The Ministry of Defence (MOD), in common with other Government Departments, operates a filing system which makes extensive use of registered files. Each file relates to a particular subject, or aspect of a subject, and has a unique identifying reference (normally an alpha/numeric combination).

Material of any classification (from RESTRICTED up to TOP SECRET) which is deemed worthy of retention on a registered file is placed on the file as soon as possible. MOD uses a system of colour coded file covers to denote the different file classifications.

A record is kept of the creation, reproduction, receipt, despatch, movements or disposal of all information marked SECRET and TOP SECRET in an appropriate register held locally by each branch/directorate within the MOD.

Regular, efficient inspections of registers and random spot checks of classified information and registered files constitute the main safeguards of classified information.

These principles apply equally to classified information held on MOD’s IT systems.

The Minister for the Armed Forces is responsible for the protection of classified information.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence for what reasons his Department changed the methodology for collating the number of personnel undertaking operations and other military tasks in 2005-06; and if he will make a statement. (106648)

The methodology for collating numbers of personnel on operations and other military tasks has not changed.

Officials have reviewed the tables in my previous answer of 4 September 2006, Official Report, columns 1682-84W, and established that the answer was incorrect. Annual reports up to 2004-05 should have made clear that the percentages quoted for the Army did include those preparing for or recovering from operations.

To ask the Secretary of State for Defence pursuant to the answer of 23 January 2007, Official Report, column 1636W, on warships; what warships were based at each location in (i) 2004, (ii) 2005 and (iii) 2006; and which are based at each in 2007. (122370)

[holding answer 26 February 2007]: The warships currently based at Devonport, Portsmouth and Faslane are as follows:

2007:

(a) Devonport

Albion

Argyll

Bulwark

Campbeltown

Chatham

Cornwall

Cumberland

Echo

Gleaner

Monmouth

Montrose

Northumberland

Ocean

Portland

Roebuck

Scott

Somerset

Sutherland

Total—18

(b) Portsmouth

Ark Royal

Atherstone

Blazer

Brocklesby

Cattistock

Clyde

Dasher

Dumbarton Castle

Edinburgh

Endurance

Exeter

Gloucester

Hurworth

Illustrious

Iron Duke

Kent

Lancaster

Ledbury

Liverpool

Manchester

Mersey

Middleton

Nottingham

Puncher

Quorn

Richmond

Severn

Southampton

St. Albans

Tracker

Tyne

Westminster

York

Total—33

(c) Faslane

Bangor

Blyth

Grimsby

Pembroke

Penzance

Ramsey

Shoreham

Walney

Total—8

Detailed information about the base port history of each Royal Navy warship is not held centrally. The figures provided in response to the hon. Gentleman’s question of 23 January 2007, Official Report, column 1636W, were the best estimates available at the time. Further work has refined the current position, and is reflected in the information provided. Detailed information for 2004, 2005 and 2006 is, however, not available and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what representations she (a) has made and (b) plans to make to the Burmese Government about religious discrimination and restriction in Burma. (124627)

I refer the hon. Member to the answer I gave the hon. Member for Cheadle (Mark Hunter) on 19 February 2007, Official Report, columns 394-95W.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what her Department's policy is on the merits of a UN Security Council resolution requiring the State Peace and Development Council of Myanmar to cease violation of human rights in that country. (124703)

Our policy is to support all action in the UN, including in the Security Council, which helps to promote reform and positive change and full respect for human rights in Burma, We therefore co-sponsored the UN Security Council Resolution on Burma with the United States which was put to the vote on 12 January. Nine members of the Security Council voted for the Resolution. However, the Resolution was not adopted, as two permanent members of the Security Council—China and Russia—voted against, as did South Africa.

Disappointing though this result was, it is important to note that all Security Council members agreed that there were serious issues of concern in Burma. This and the positive votes from a majority of Council partners reflected the international community’s deep concern over the plight of Burma’s people. We will continue to work within the UN to ensure that Burma remains on the UN Security Council agenda.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps the Government have taken to raise the issue of human trafficking, particularly of women in Kachin State, with the régime in Burma; and what response has been received. (124154)

We are aware of reports written by the Kachin Women's Association Thailand and Christian Solidarity Worldwide on this issue. On 24 January, I met representatives from the Chin and Kachin ethnic groups to discuss human rights violations, including human trafficking. We take every opportunity to raise human rights issues with the regime and remind them of their obligations to adhere to international human rights law.

I have raised the human rights situation regularly with the Burmese regime and other Governments in the region. On 15 June 2006, I called in the Burmese ambassador and on 5 July 2006 I wrote to the Burmese Foreign Minister, highlighting our many concerns, including issues such as human trafficking and the treatment of all Burma's ethnic groups. The Minister has not responded to my letter.

On 18 September 2006, I raised the serious human rights situation with Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) ambassadors, including the Burmese ambassador, and on 4 December 2006 with the ASEAN Secretary-General. I have also raised Burma with the Governments of China, India, Japan, Thailand and South Korea. I have discussed the human rights abuses taking place in Burma with Juan Méndez, the UN Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide. I discussed Burma in detail with Ibrahim Gambari, the UN Under Secretary-General for Political Affairs, on 15 November 2006, following his visit to the country.

In addition, our ambassador in Rangoon regularly raises human rights with the regime, most recently when he met the Burmese Ministers for Planning and Immigration and the Burmese Deputy Foreign Minister on 5 January.

We fully support all action in the UN, including in the Security Council, which helps to promote reform and positive change in Burma. We therefore co-sponsored the UN Security Council Resolution on Burma, with the United States, calling on the regime to bring an end to all human rights violations in Burma. This was put to the vote on 12 January. Nine members of the Security Council voted for the Resolution. However the Resolution was not adopted, as two permanent members of the Security Council—China and Russia—voted against, as did South Africa.

Disappointing though this result was, it is important to note that all Security Council members agreed that there were serious issues of concern in Burma. This, and the positive votes from a majority of Council partners, reflected the international community's deep concern over the plight of Burma's people. We will continue to work within the UN to ensure that Burma remains on the UN Security Council agenda.

The UK also helped draft the Resolution adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 22 December 2006 which expressed grave concern about human trafficking.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs if the Government will discuss violations of religious freedom in Burma with the UN's Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Religion and Belief. (124665)

The Government have not yet had the opportunity to discuss religious freedom in Burma with the UN Special Rapporteur for Freedom of Religion and Belief. However, I have raised the human rights situation regularly with the Burmese regime and other Governments in the region. On 16 June 2006, I called in the Burmese ambassador, and on 5 July 2006 I wrote to the Burmese Foreign Minister, highlighting our many concerns, including the freedom to express religious belief. On 18 September 2006, I raised the serious human rights situation with Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) ambassadors, including the Burmese ambassador, and on 4 December 2006 with the ASEAN Secretary-General. I have also raised Burma with the Governments of China, India, Japan, Thailand and South Korea. I have discussed the human rights abuses taking place in Burma with Juan Mendez, the United Nations Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide. I discussed Burma in detail with Ibrahim Gambari, the United Nations Under Secretary-General for Political Affairs, on 15 November 2006, following his visit to the country. On 24 January, I met representatives from the Burmese Chin and Kachin ethnic groups to discuss the many difficulties faced by their respective communities, including violations of their religious freedoms.

In addition, our ambassador in Rangoon regularly raises human rights with the regime, most recently when he met the Burmese Ministers for Planning and Immigration and the Burmese Deputy Foreign Minister on 5 January.

We shall continue, bilaterally and with international partners, to urge the Burmese regime to pursue laws and practices which foster tolerance and mutual respect and protect religious minorities from persecution and discrimination.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps her Department is taking to support attempts at an EU level to press for a global moratorium on the use of capital punishment. (124645)

We oppose the death penalty in all circumstances as a matter of principle and are working with our EU partners towards universal abolition. This includes consideration of a death penalty initiative in the UN General Assembly. It has proven difficult in the past to secure a UN resolution calling for a global moratorium on the death penalty and it is important that we secure an acceptably strong text. We are discussing with EU partners how best to advance this.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what steps her Department is taking relating to the situation in Guinea; and if she will make a statement. (123826)

We have been concerned by events in Guinea and regret the loss of life resulting from clashes between protesters and security forces. In conjunction with international partners, our ambassador in Conakry has made several representations to the Guinean Government expressing our concern and hope that all the issues can be resolved in a way acceptable to all. We note, and welcome, the lifting of martial law on 23 February and an ending to the strike. We will continue to monitor the situation closely. We are also keeping the consular situation under close review.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assessment she has made of the impact which the instability in Guinea is having in the region; and if she will make a statement. (123827)

There has been no substantial impact on the region by events in Guinea so far. However, we have concerns that if the situation substantially deteriorated again, there could be an impact on Guinea’s neighbouring countries. We therefore welcome the efforts of the Economic Community of West African States and regional heads of state in helping to mediate between the Guinean Government and the trade unions and opposition parties.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what support her Department is giving to the Government of Guinea to help resolve the instability in that country; and if she will make a statement. (123828)

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave to him today (UIN 123826).

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what consideration is being given to possible military assistance to the Guinean Government; and if she will make a statement. (123847)

We have no plans to provide military assistance to the Guinean Government.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions she has had with the Government of France regarding the situation in Guinea; and if she will make a statement. (123848)

We have discussed the current situation in Guinea with French colleagues in Paris and in Conakry, and will continue to do so. Discussions have covered political events and also consular contingency planning should the situation deteriorate again.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions have been held in the UN Security Council regarding the situation in Guinea; and if she will make a statement. (123849)

There have been no discussions regarding Guinea at the UN Security Council so far. The Secretary-General of the UN issued a statement on 22 January expressing grave concern at events. The statement can be found on the UN website at:

http://www.un.org/apps/sg/sgstats.asp?nid=2417

I will also arrange for a copy to be sent to my hon. Friend and a copy will also be placed in the Library of the House.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what assistance is being given to facilitate a national dialogue to resolve the situation in Guinea; and if she will make a statement. (123852)

I refer my hon. Friend to the reply I gave to him today (UIN 123826).

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what discussions she has had with the American Government on the transfer of control of Iraqi airspace from American responsibility to that of Iraq. (124277)

My right hon. Friend the Foreign Secretary has not had any such discussions directly with the US Administration. The process of transferring control of Iraqi airspace to Iraq is being led by the US, on behalf of the Multi-National Force Iraq. Through the Iraqi Reconstruction Management Office, it is working to build up the Government of Iraq's capacity to manage their own airspace. For our part, we have been providing support and training to Iraqi civilian air operations from and to Basra International airport.

To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs what recent assessment she has made of the effectiveness of efforts of the Government of the Maldives to reach internationally accepted standards on (a) the democratic process, (b) a fair legal system and (c) a free and diverse media; and if she will make a statement. (125257)

I refer the hon. Gentleman to the answers that my right hon. Friend the Minister of State for Trade (Mr. McCartney) and I gave to the hon. Member for Cotswold (Mr. Clifton-Brown) on 27 February 2007, Official Report, columns 1198-99W.

We welcome the statements by the Government of the Maldives that they are committed to a process of reform leading to multi-party democracy. While some progress has been made, there are still significant obstacles. The Government have been encouraging a process of all-party talks to accelerate the reform process.

We remain concerned, however, about the Government of the Maldives’ approach towards people, including journalists, members of the main opposition Maldivian Democratic Party and others, who are active in promoting democratic change in the Maldives. The use of the judicial process in a seemingly politically motivated way is one of those concerns.

At the invitation of the Government of the Maldives, the UN Special Rapporteur on the independence of judges and lawyers, Mr. Leandro Despouy, recently visited the Maldives to assist the Government in their implementation of judicial reforms. He has made a number of preliminary observations and will report his findings and recommendations for strengthening the Maldivian judiciary and assuring its independence to the UN Human Rights Council.