Linked Data API

Show Search Form

Search Results

32172
star this property human indexable true more like this
star this property published true more like this
star this property registered interest false more like this
star this property answer date less than 2014-01-13more like thismore than 2014-01-13
star this property date less than 2014-01-09more like thismore than 2014-01-09
star this property date tabled less than 2014-01-09more like thisremove minimum value filter
star this property ddp created less than 2014-01-09T21:01:11.303Zmore like thismore than 2014-01-09T21:01:11.303Z
star this property ddp modified less than 2015-02-07T01:00:12.447Zmore like thismore than 2015-02-07T01:00:12.447Z
star this property answering body
HM Treasury more like this
star this property question status Tabled more like this
unstar this property answering dept id 14 more like this
star this property answering dept short name
star this property answering dept sort name
star this property house id 1 more like this
star this property identifier 182696 more like this
star this property legislature
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property parliament number 55 more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-07T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-07T12:00:00.00Z
star this property question text To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what proportion and value of his Department's contracts have been let (a) under the restricted procedure, (b) by the open procedure, (c) via framework agreements and (d) via a tendering process involving the use of a pre-qualification questionnaire in each of the last three years. more like this
star this property session
2013/14 more like this
star this property session number 3 more like this
star this property tabling member constituency Nottingham East more like this
star this property tabling member printed
Chris Leslie more like this
star this property title House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2013/14 182696 more like this
star this property type
WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
star this property uin 182696 more like this
star this property version 1 more like this
star this property written parliamentary question type Ordinary more like this
star this property answer
answer
unstar this property is ministerial correction false more like this
unstar this property answer text <p>Since January 2011, central government departments have been required to publish on Contracts Finder information on the tenders issued and contracts they award with a value over £10,000 (excluding VAT) (www.gov.uk/contractsfinder).</p><p> </p><p>Public Procurement Regulations require that prescribed procurement procedures are used when procurements exceed the EU contract threshold values. This legal framework helps to ensure that public procurement is conducted in a fair and open manner both within the UK and across the EU.</p><p> </p><p>Less than two percent of all contracts were let under the restricted procedure in each of the last three years.</p><p> </p><p>In 2010/11 there was one contract let under the restricted procedure. This was for actuarial support to the independent commission on Equitable Life Payments that was set up by this government to recommend how best to fairly allocate funds provided for the Equitable Life Payments Scheme (ELPS) and had a contract value of £1million.</p><p> </p><p>In 2011/12 there were two contracts let under the restricted procedure. They were (i) Corporate Financial Advice framework contract (estimated contract value of £5 million over the 2 years but no guaranteed spend)and (ii) a contract for actuarial support for (ELPS) in making fair and transparent payments to Equitable Life policyholders who suffered financial losses as a result of Government maladministration which occurred in the regulation of Equitable Life. The contract value was £5.4 million.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>The information requested for the proportion and value of HM Treasury contracts that have been let via framework agreements and where a tendering process involving the use of a pre-qualification questionnaire in each of the last three years is not readily available and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.</p><p> </p>
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-07T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-07T12:00:00.00Z
star this property creator
422
star this property label Biography information for Mr Chris Leslie more like this
star this property publisher
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property tabling member
422
unstar this property label Biography information for Mr Chris Leslie more like this
36720
star this property human indexable true more like this
star this property published true more like this
star this property registered interest false more like this
star this property answer date remove maximum value filtermore like thismore than 2014-02-10
star this property date less than 2014-02-04more like thismore than 2014-02-04
star this property date tabled less than 2014-02-04more like thismore than 2014-02-04
star this property ddp created less than 2014-02-04T22:01:02.157Zmore like thismore than 2014-02-04T22:01:02.157Z
star this property ddp modified less than 2015-02-07T01:40:46.947Zmore like thismore than 2015-02-07T01:40:46.947Z
star this property answering body
HM Treasury more like this
star this property question status Tabled more like this
unstar this property answering dept id 14 more like this
star this property answering dept short name
star this property answering dept sort name
star this property house id 1 more like this
star this property identifier 186697 more like this
star this property legislature
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property parliament number 55 more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-07T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-07T12:00:00.00Z
star this property question text To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, what proportion of (a) permanent, (b) temporary and (c) contract staff in his Department as paid the living wage or above. more like this
star this property session
2013/14 more like this
star this property session number 3 more like this
star this property tabling member constituency Bradford East more like this
star this property tabling member printed
Mr David Ward more like this
star this property title House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2013/14 186697 more like this
star this property type
WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
star this property uin 186697 more like this
star this property version 2 more like this
star this property written parliamentary question type NamedDay more like this
star this property answer
answer
unstar this property is ministerial correction false more like this
unstar this property answer text <p>100% of permanent and temporary staff at HM Treasury are paid the Living Wage or above.</p><p> </p><p>HM Treasury fully complies with EU procurement directives and awards contracts on the basis of the best value for money for the taxpayer. Nevertheless, we have encouraged contractors to commit to paying a living wage and expect all employers to pay at least the national minimum wage.</p><p> </p><p>The Government supports businesses that choose to pay the Living Wage however the Government's main policy on wages is the National Minimum Wage, which has continued to protect the relative wages of the low paid. This is independently set by the Low Pay Commission at a level that maximises their wages without reducing employment prospect. It is for workers and employers to decide the level of wages above the minimum wage based on current circumstances. This includes the Government as a procurer and an employer. Over 95%, around 20 million employees earn above the minimum wage and the majority of public sector workers currently earn above the Living Wage.</p><p> </p>
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-07T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-07T12:00:00.00Z
star this property creator
3923
star this property label Biography information for Mr David Ward more like this
star this property publisher
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property tabling member
3923
unstar this property label Biography information for Mr David Ward more like this
32412
star this property human indexable true more like this
star this property published true more like this
star this property registered interest false more like this
star this property answer date less than 2014-01-16more like thismore than 2014-01-16
star this property date less than 2014-01-13more like thismore than 2014-01-13
star this property date tabled less than 2014-01-13more like thismore than 2014-01-13
star this property ddp created less than 2014-01-14T00:30:42.163Zmore like thismore than 2014-01-14T00:30:42.163Z
star this property ddp modified less than 2015-02-07T01:02:03.793Zmore like thismore than 2015-02-07T01:02:03.793Z
star this property answering body
Department for Communities and Local Government more like this
star this property question status Tabled more like this
unstar this property answering dept id 7 more like this
star this property answering dept short name
star this property answering dept sort name
star this property house id 1 more like this
star this property identifier 182969 more like this
star this property legislature
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property parliament number 55 more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-12T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-12T12:00:00.00Z
star this property question text To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what funding will be put in place to support local discretionary welfare provision after 2015. more like this
star this property session
2013/14 more like this
star this property session number 3 more like this
star this property tabling member constituency Rochdale more like this
star this property tabling member printed
Simon Danczuk more like this
star this property title House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2013/14 182969 more like this
star this property type
WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
star this property uin 182969 more like this
star this property version 1 more like this
star this property written parliamentary question type NamedDay more like this
star this property answer
answer
unstar this property is ministerial correction false more like this
unstar this property answer text <p> </p><p><em>[Holding Reply: Thursday 16 January 2014]</em></p><p>The nationally run Community Care Grants and Crisis Loans were poorly targeted and failed to help those most in need. So, in 2012 as part of wider welfare reform, the Department for Work and Pensions abolished these national discretionary schemes and transferred responsibility to local authorities so they could deliver and tailor new local support as part of their existing services to their communities.</p><p>Councils can continue to provide support to those in their community who face financial difficulties or who find themselves in unavoidable circumstances, but there is no requirement to replicate the previous approach adopted by central government.</p><p>In contrast to a centralised grant system that was poorly targeted, under the Department for Work and Pensions' reforms, councils can now choose how best to support local welfare needs within their areas – what is right for, say, Rochdale may not be for other authorities. Some councils have already chosen to wind down their dedicated schemes following underspends.</p><p>In the next Spending Round period, from April 2015, central government continues to provide support to local authorities through general funds as part of the Coalition Government's commitment to reducing ring-fencing and ending top-down Whitehall control.</p><p>The Department for Work and Pensions provided a separate fund for 2013-2015 and are carrying out a review of the provision to date.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-12T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-12T12:00:00.00Z
star this property creator
4059
star this property label Biography information for Simon Danczuk more like this
star this property publisher
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property tabling member
4059
unstar this property label Biography information for Simon Danczuk more like this
34720
star this property human indexable true more like this
star this property published true more like this
star this property registered interest false more like this
star this property answer date less than 2014-01-27more like thismore than 2014-01-27
star this property date less than 2014-01-23more like thismore than 2014-01-23
star this property date tabled less than 2014-01-23more like thismore than 2014-01-23
star this property ddp created less than 2014-01-23T21:10:35.153Zmore like thismore than 2014-01-23T21:10:35.153Z
star this property ddp modified less than 2015-02-07T01:23:53.737Zmore like thismore than 2015-02-07T01:23:53.737Z
star this property answering body
Department for Communities and Local Government more like this
star this property question status Tabled more like this
unstar this property answering dept id 7 more like this
star this property answering dept short name
star this property answering dept sort name
star this property house id 1 more like this
star this property identifier 184873 more like this
star this property legislature
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property parliament number 55 more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-14T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-14T12:00:00.00Z
star this property question text To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how many households in England received a weekly general, all-purpose, rubbish collection service in (a) 2010, (b) 2011, (c) 2012 and (d) 2013. more like this
star this property session
2013/14 more like this
star this property session number 3 more like this
star this property tabling member constituency Sheffield South East more like this
star this property tabling member printed
Mr Clive Betts more like this
star this property title House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2013/14 184873 more like this
star this property type
WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
star this property uin 184873 more like this
star this property version 2 more like this
star this property written parliamentary question type Ordinary more like this
star this property answer
answer
unstar this property is ministerial correction false more like this
unstar this property answer text <p> </p><p><em>Labour's legacy</em></p><p>The last Labour Government had a policy of actively pushing fortnightly bin collections and hitting hard-working families with new bin charges.Their ‘Household Waste Prevention Policy Side Research Programme' advocated “collection limitations in terms of rubbish bin size or the interval between collections”, and sought to “nationalise this policy among local authorities”. Cutting weekly rubbish collections was not a locally-led initiative, but an explicit Whitehall mission pursued with the zeal of a convert.</p><p>Legislation in 2005 allowed the introduction of bin fines for minor breaches of complex and confusing bin rules; further legislation in 2008 watered down councils' legal duties to collect rubbish. Guidance issued in 2005 advised town halls that councillors should be bullied to stop them opposing the axing of collections or proposing to restore weekly collections. It also recommended that cutting collections should be done after local elections – to avoid the nuisance of democratic opposition. The Government funded the covert imposition of “bin brother” microchips into families' bins. The 2009 Pre-Budget Report made clear that a further wave of bin cuts were being planned. In short, the “Town Hall Talibin” doubled council tax and halved bin collections.</p><p>We disagree. This Government believes that households deserve a frequent and comprehensive rubbish and recycling service in return for the £122 a month in council tax that a typical household pays (Band D), especially given the typical refuse collection service only costs councils £6 to £7 per month to provide.</p><p><em>What we've done</em></p><p>We have taken a series of steps to help households:</p><p> </p><p>· Issued the first ever Whitehall guidance on weekly bin collections, demolishing the myths that fortnightly bin collections are needed to save money or increase recycling;</p><p> </p><p>· Stopped the Audit Commission inspections which marked down councils who do not adopt fortnightly rubbish collections, and rejected the Audit Commission guidance which advocated fortnightly collections (<em>Waste Management: The Strategic Challenge</em> and <em>Waste Management Quick Guide</em>).</p><p> </p><p>· Abolished the Local Area Agreements and National Indicator 191 imposed by Whitehall which created perverse incentives to downgrade waste collection services;</p><p> </p><p>· Scrapped the Whitehall requirement for municipal Annual Efficiency Statements, which allowed a reduction in the frequency of a household rubbish collection service to qualify as a “valid efficiency” and allowed revenue from bin fines to classed as a “cashable efficiency gain”;</p><p> </p><p>· Scrapped the imposition of eco-towns which would have had fortnightly bin collections and/or bin taxes as part of the “eco-standards”;</p><p> </p><p>· Safeguarded weekly collections for 6 million households through the Weekly Collection Support Scheme as well as championing innovation and best practice;</p><p> </p><p>· Supported over 40 innovative reward schemes to back recycling through the Weekly Collection Support Scheme (as pledged in the Coalition Agreement);</p><p> </p><p>· Through the Localism Act, revoked the 2008 legislation that allowed for the imposition of new bin taxes;</p><p> </p><p>· Issued guidance to stop the imposition of illegal ‘backdoor bin charging' on households bins;</p><p> </p><p>· Stopped funding the ‘Waste Improvement Network' which told councils to adopt fortnightly collections as best practice;</p><p> </p><p>· Challenged the incorrect interpretation by some bodies that European Union directives require fortnightly collections, and resisted the imposition of bin taxes by the European Union;</p><p> </p><p>· Removing powers of entry and snooping powers from “Binquisition” inspectors and scrapped guidance telling councils to rifle through families' bins;</p><p> </p><p>· Changing building regulations to tackle ‘bin blight'; and</p><p> </p><p>· Changing the law through the Deregulation Bill to scrap unfair bin fines.</p><p>In short, this has been a fundamentally different approach from the Labour Government: we are working with families to help them go green, but believe in proper, regular and comprehensive collections for taxpaying households.</p><p>The configuration of services is complex. The table below, based on available estimates from WRAP, provide the most detailed information held on the breakdown of refuse and recycling collections of ‘smelly' rubbish across councils in England.</p><p><em>Weekly collections of smelly rubbish</em></p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><em>Councils</em></p></td><td><p><em>Weekly Residual + Separate Weekly Food Waste</em></p></td><td><p><em>Weekly Residual + Weekly mixed food and garden waste</em></p></td><td><p><em>Weekly Residual + fortnightly mixed food and garden waste</em></p></td><td><p><em>Weekly Residual and no separate food waste collection</em></p></td><td><p><em>Weekly Food Waste + Fortnightly Residual</em></p></td><td><p><em>Weekly mixed food and garden waste + Fortnightly Residual </em></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Jun-11</p></td><td><p>33</p></td><td><p>11</p></td><td><p>19</p></td><td><p>189</p></td><td><p>45</p></td><td><p>7</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Nov-11</p></td><td><p>31</p></td><td><p>9</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>190</p></td><td><p>52</p></td><td><p>10</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Jan-12</p></td><td><p>33</p></td><td><p>8</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>189</p></td><td><p>54</p></td><td><p>11</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Feb-12</p></td><td><p>33</p></td><td><p>8</p></td><td><p>17</p></td><td><p>182</p></td><td><p>58</p></td><td><p>11</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Aug-12</p></td><td><p>39</p></td><td><p>8</p></td><td><p>21</p></td><td><p>181</p></td><td><p>61</p></td><td><p>12</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Sep-12</p></td><td><p>39</p></td><td><p>8</p></td><td><p>20</p></td><td><p>179</p></td><td><p>62</p></td><td><p>12</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><p><em> </em></p><p> </p><table><tbody><tr><td><p><em>Households</em></p></td><td><p><em>Weekly Residual + Separate Weekly Food Waste</em></p></td><td><p><em>Weekly Residual + Weekly mixed food and garden waste</em></p></td><td><p><em>Weekly Residual + fortnightly mixed food and garden waste</em></p></td><td><p><em>Weekly collection and no separate food waste collection</em></p></td><td><p><em>Weekly Food Waste + Fortnightly Residual</em></p></td><td><p><em>Weekly mixed food and garden waste + Fortnightly Residual </em></p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Jun-11</p></td><td><p>1,296,296</p></td><td><p>405,719</p></td><td><p>718,292</p></td><td><p>10,480,876</p></td><td><p>1,750,654</p></td><td><p>353,001</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Nov-11</p></td><td><p>1,079,984</p></td><td><p>479,151</p></td><td><p>998,017</p></td><td><p>9,694,524</p></td><td><p>2,197,166</p></td><td><p>542,695</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Jan-12</p></td><td><p>1,141,584</p></td><td><p>441,151</p></td><td><p>998,017</p></td><td><p>9,341,759</p></td><td><p>2,426,531</p></td><td><p>602,695</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Feb-12</p></td><td><p>1,124,040</p></td><td><p>441,151</p></td><td><p>861,447</p></td><td><p>9,064,454</p></td><td><p>2,571,575</p></td><td><p>602,695</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Aug-12</p></td><td><p>1,378,876</p></td><td><p>440,812</p></td><td><p>851,915</p></td><td><p>8,239,673</p></td><td><p>2,896,107</p></td><td><p>747,024</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Sep-12</p></td><td><p>1,386,876</p></td><td><p>440,812</p></td><td><p>747,915</p></td><td><p>7,885,321</p></td><td><p>2,981,513</p></td><td><p>747,024</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p><em>Fortnightly collections</em></p><p> </p><table><thead><tr><td><p><em>Councils</em></p></td><td><p><em>Fortnightly mixed food and garden waste + Fortnightly Residual</em></p></td><td><p><em>Fortnightly residual and no separate food waste collection</em></p></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><p>Jun-11</p></td><td><p>36</p></td><td><p>143</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Nov-11</p></td><td><p>41</p></td><td><p>142</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Jan-12</p></td><td><p>41</p></td><td><p>144</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Feb-12</p></td><td><p>44</p></td><td><p>149</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Aug-12</p></td><td><p>47</p></td><td><p>145</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Sep-12</p></td><td><p>49</p></td><td><p>147</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p> </p><table><thead><tr><td><p><em>Households</em></p></td><td><p><em>Fortnightly mixed food and garden waste + Fortnightly Residual</em></p></td><td><p><em>Fortnightly residual and no separate food waste collection</em></p></td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><p>Jun-11</p></td><td><p>1,668,211</p></td><td><p>5,879,808</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Nov-11</p></td><td><p>1,838,632</p></td><td><p>6,014,336</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Jan-12</p></td><td><p>1,860,532</p></td><td><p>6,032,245</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Feb-12</p></td><td><p>2,034,102</p></td><td><p>6,145,050</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Aug-12</p></td><td><p>2,170,143</p></td><td><p>6,173,402</p></td></tr><tr><td><p>Sep-12</p></td><td><p>2,319,143</p></td><td><p>6,389,348</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>Note: Some councils may have a combination of the categories in the table below and have been counted under each one that they provide.</p><p>This shows that 14 million households in England have some form of weekly collection of smelly rubbish. Had the Government not taken the actions it had, weekly collections would have disappeared in England by 2015. This simple assertion can be illustrated by the extinction of weekly collections in most of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, which have devolved Administrations and policies of supporting fortnightly bin collections. Indeed, in Wales, the Labour-led Welsh Government now has a policy of supporting monthly bin collections (Welsh Government, <em>Municipal Sector Plan Part 1</em>, March 2011 and Welsh Government, <em>Cabinet decision, Minister for Environment and Sustainable Development, Additional Funding for Zero Waste Gurnos</em>, February 2012).</p><p>We have stopped the rot, but there is more to do to support weekly bin collections. Many town hall jobsworths, over-zealous NGOs and vested interests in the waste industry remain blindly obsessed with restricting bin collections as a perverse policy goal in itself, and this is reflected in the figures in the table above. Indeed, even Keep Britain Tidy – which one would think would want regular rubbish collections to keep the streets clean – has been taken over by a NGO (Waste Watch) which campaigns for fortnightly bin collections. Bin collections are not viewed as a public service – but as a policy tool to deliver other arbitrary policy goals.</p><p><em>More to do</em></p><p>One option which should be considered is a minimum service standard – for example, the Household Waste Recycling Act 2003 already lays down minimum service requirements for recycling, and indeed, the Public Health Act 1875 introduced a duty on local authorities to collect rubbish; this duty was enhanced by the Public Health Act 1936 obliging them to collect household waste weekly which existed until 1974.</p><p>Moving forward, we are open to representations on how best to support frequent and comprehensive rubbish and recycling service; stand up for taxpayers' interests from arbitrary state charges and taxes; and protect the local environment, public health and local amenity from the nuisance of stinking rubbish.</p><p> </p><p> </p>
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-14T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-14T12:00:00.00Z
star this property creator
394
star this property label Biography information for Mr Clive Betts more like this
star this property publisher
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property tabling member
394
unstar this property label Biography information for Mr Clive Betts more like this
36160
star this property human indexable true more like this
star this property published true more like this
star this property registered interest false more like this
star this property answer date less than 2014-02-03more like thismore than 2014-02-03
star this property date less than 2014-01-30more like thismore than 2014-01-30
star this property date tabled less than 2014-01-30more like thismore than 2014-01-30
star this property ddp created less than 2014-01-30T21:00:56.467Zmore like thismore than 2014-01-30T21:00:56.467Z
star this property ddp modified less than 2015-02-07T01:36:36.310Zmore like thismore than 2015-02-07T01:36:36.310Z
star this property answering body
Ministry of Justice more like this
star this property question status Tabled more like this
unstar this property answering dept id 54 more like this
star this property answering dept short name
star this property answering dept sort name
star this property house id 1 more like this
star this property identifier 186075 more like this
star this property legislature
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property parliament number 55 more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-04-01T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-04-01T12:00:00.00Z
star this property question text To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effect of the Integrated Offender Management model piloted in the London Borough of Islington on reoffending rates in that area. more like this
star this property session
2013/14 more like this
star this property session number 3 more like this
star this property tabling member constituency Rotherham more like this
star this property tabling member printed
Sarah Champion more like this
star this property title House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2013/14 186075 more like this
star this property type
WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
star this property uin 186075 more like this
star this property version 1 more like this
star this property written parliamentary question type Ordinary more like this
star this property answer
answer
unstar this property is ministerial correction false more like this
unstar this property answer text <p>I have been asked to reply on behalf of the Home Office. Integrated Offender Management is an important approach to cutting crime and reoffending in local areas. One of the key strengths of the approach is that the local model should be responsive to local needs and priorities as identified by the agencies and the partners in the area. For this reason, we have not imposed any particular model of Integrated Offender Management on areas, nor do we performance manage from Whitehall the crime and reoffending outcomes that local partners in areas such as the London Borough of Islington may be achieving through their local approach.</p> more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-04-01T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-04-01T12:00:00.00Z
star this property creator
4267
star this property label Biography information for Sarah Champion more like this
star this property publisher
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property tabling member
4267
unstar this property label Biography information for Sarah Champion more like this
33663
star this property human indexable true more like this
star this property published true more like this
star this property registered interest false more like this
star this property answer date less than 2014-01-21more like thismore than 2014-01-21
star this property date less than 2014-01-16more like thismore than 2014-01-16
star this property date tabled less than 2014-01-16more like thismore than 2014-01-16
star this property ddp created less than 2014-01-16T20:50:44.760Zmore like thismore than 2014-01-16T20:50:44.760Z
star this property ddp modified less than 2015-02-07T01:13:58.317Zmore like thismore than 2015-02-07T01:13:58.317Z
star this property answering body
Ministry of Justice more like this
star this property question status Tabled more like this
unstar this property answering dept id 54 more like this
star this property answering dept short name
star this property answering dept sort name
star this property house id 1 more like this
star this property identifier 183913 more like this
star this property legislature
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property parliament number 55 more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-04-07T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-04-07T12:00:00.00Z
star this property question text To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what his Department's 10 largest contracts let since the financial year 2010-11 are; what savings have been made in such contracts; what the level of overspend or underspend was in each such contract; and what steps his Department has taken to monitor the performance of each supplier of such contract following the contract award. more like this
star this property session
2013/14 more like this
star this property session number 3 more like this
star this property tabling member constituency Nottingham East more like this
star this property tabling member printed
Chris Leslie more like this
star this property title House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2013/14 183913 more like this
star this property type
WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
star this property uin 183913 more like this
star this property version 1 more like this
star this property written parliamentary question type NamedDay more like this
star this property answer
answer
unstar this property is ministerial correction false more like this
unstar this property answer text <p> </p><p> </p><p>The Ministry of Justice has taken a number of steps to improve commercial capability across the department. We regularly review suppliers' performance against key performance indicators and have recently embarked on a programme aimed at introducing a more robust approach to contract management, to ensure that contracts deliver best possible value for the taxpayer.</p><p> </p><p>The table below features the ten largest contracts let by the Ministry of Justice since the financial year 2010/11, and provides details of savings and of any under- or overspend in each financial year.</p> more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-04-07T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-04-07T12:00:00.00Z
star this property creator
422
star this property label Biography information for Mr Chris Leslie more like this
star this property publisher
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property tabling member
422
unstar this property label Biography information for Mr Chris Leslie more like this
37588
star this property human indexable true more like this
star this property published true more like this
star this property registered interest false more like this
star this property answer date remove maximum value filtermore like thismore than 2014-02-10
star this property date less than 2014-02-06more like thismore than 2014-02-06
star this property date tabled less than 2014-02-06more like thismore than 2014-02-06
star this property ddp created less than 2014-02-06T20:21:28.773Zmore like thismore than 2014-02-06T20:21:28.773Z
star this property ddp modified less than 2015-02-07T01:48:31.897Zmore like thismore than 2015-02-07T01:48:31.897Z
star this property answering body
Ministry of Justice more like this
star this property question status Tabled more like this
unstar this property answering dept id 54 more like this
star this property answering dept short name
star this property answering dept sort name
star this property house id 1 more like this
star this property identifier 187126 more like this
star this property legislature
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property parliament number 55 more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-14T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-14T12:00:00.00Z
star this property question text To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what plans his Department has to increase the average hours a week of contracted education provided for 15 to 17 year olds in custody. more like this
star this property session
2013/14 more like this
star this property session number 3 more like this
star this property tabling member constituency Hendon more like this
star this property tabling member printed
Dr Matthew Offord more like this
star this property title House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2013/14 187126 more like this
star this property type
WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
star this property uin 187126 more like this
star this property version 1 more like this
star this property written parliamentary question type Ordinary more like this
star this property answer
answer
unstar this property is ministerial correction false more like this
unstar this property answer text <p>At present 15-17 year olds in young offender institutions (YOIs) receive an average of only 12 hours contracted education a week. We have recently set out our plans for transforming youth custody and putting education at the heart of detention, and at the same time launched a competition for new education contracts in public sector YOIs which will more than double the time spend young people spend in education. In addition, we are seeking to put education at the heart of the YOI regime by bringing the head teacher overseeing education into the senior management team of the establishment.</p> more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-14T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-14T12:00:00.00Z
star this property creator
4006
star this property label Biography information for Dr Matthew Offord more like this
star this property publisher
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property tabling member
4006
unstar this property label Biography information for Dr Matthew Offord more like this
33630
star this property human indexable true more like this
star this property published true more like this
star this property registered interest false more like this
star this property answer date less than 2014-01-23more like thismore than 2014-01-23
star this property date less than 2014-01-16more like thismore than 2014-01-16
star this property date tabled less than 2014-01-16more like thismore than 2014-01-16
star this property ddp created less than 2014-01-16T20:50:41.780Zmore like thismore than 2014-01-16T20:50:41.780Z
star this property ddp modified less than 2015-02-07T01:13:38.423Zmore like thismore than 2015-02-07T01:13:38.423Z
star this property answering body
Department for Communities and Local Government more like this
star this property question status Tabled more like this
unstar this property answering dept id 7 more like this
star this property answering dept short name
star this property answering dept sort name
star this property house id 1 more like this
star this property identifier 183915 more like this
star this property legislature
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property parliament number 55 more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-13T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-13T12:00:00.00Z
star this property question text To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what progress has been made on plans to increase house building by 2030. more like this
star this property session
2013/14 more like this
star this property session number 3 more like this
star this property tabling member constituency Redditch more like this
star this property tabling member printed
Karen Lumley more like this
star this property title House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2013/14 183915 more like this
star this property type
WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
star this property uin 183915 more like this
star this property version 1 more like this
star this property written parliamentary question type NamedDay more like this
star this property answer
answer
unstar this property is ministerial correction false more like this
unstar this property answer text <p> </p><p><em>[Holding Reply: Thursday 23 January 2014]</em></p><p>The Government does not have a Whitehall building target. The last Administration had a state target to increase house building to 240,000 dwellings a year, yet house building then fell to its lowest peacetime rate since the 1920s.</p><p>By contrast, the Coalition Government has put in place a range of measures to get Britain building again, fix the broken housing market and help hard-working people get the home they want.</p><p>Action taken includes wide-ranging planning reform through National Planning Policy Framework; new incentives to deliver housing growth through the New Homes Bonus; as well as the Government's broader long-term economic plan to tackle the deficit left by the last Administration and keep interest rates down. I would note:</p><p>· We have already delivered 420,000 new homes since 2010.</p><p>· New orders in residential construction have risen to their highest level since 2007 according to the Office for National Statistics;</p><p>· Housing starts are at their highest since 2007 according to DCLG figures;</p><p>· The number of first time buyers is at its highest since 2007 according to the Council for Mortgage Lenders;</p><p>· Repossessions are at their lowest since 2007, according to the Council for Mortgage Lenders; and</p><p>· New home registrations rose by 30 per cent in 2013 in England, the highest since 2007, and are up 60 per cent in London, according to the NHBC.</p><p>In relation to specific programmes:</p><p><em>Affordable housing</em></p><p>170,000 affordable homes have been delivered in England since April 2010.</p><p>Our Affordable Homes Programme will deliver 170,000 homes over the current spending review period (2011-2015) levering in £19.5 billion of public and private funding. We have announced a new ‘Affordable Rent to Buy' scheme which will deliver affordable homes through a recoverable fund. We have also published details of a new Affordable Homes Programme for the next spending period, which will lever in up to £23 billion in public and private funding to deliver 165,000 homes from 2015 to 2018.</p><p>The Affordable Housing Guarantee Scheme is worth up to £3.5 billion (with further lending capacity held in reserve according to demand) and supported by up to £450 million grant funding in England. Up to 30,000 additional affordable homes will be underway by December 2017. Affordable Housing Finance Plc was awarded the licence for the Affordable Housing Guarantee Scheme in June 2013. The first eight housing associations to be approved to borrow through the scheme were announced in January 2014, who will raise over £400 million of debt to facilitate the delivery of over 4,000 new affordable homes. We also announced a European Investment Bank loan facility worth £500 million. More borrowers will follow.</p><p>The Right to Buy Scheme, allowing eligible social tenants to buy their homes at a discount has achieved almost 24,000 sales since April 2010, with the majority (16,200) since we reinvigorated the scheme in 2012. A total of 2,845 council properties were sold between October and December last year, a 42 per cent increase on the same period in 2012. The reinvigorated Right to Buy ensures, for the first time, that the receipts from the additional sales, that is those over what was forecast prior to the change, are reinvested in helping to fund new homes for affordable rent. So far, £300 million has been generated from additional sales and already over 2,000 homes have been started on site or acquired since April 2012.</p><p><em>Home ownership schemes (Help to Buy)</em></p><p>Since April 2013, the Help to Buy: Equity Loan scheme has offered buyers a 20 per cent equity loan that can be used towards the cost of buying a new build homes, allowing people to buy with a 5 per cent deposit. There were over 30,000 reservations and 19,394 completed loans across England by the end of March 2014, with funding for up to 74,000 sales by March 2016. Alongside this, the Help to Buy: NewBuy scheme has so far supported a further 5,173 households purchase new build homes by the end of March 2014. The Help to Buy: Equity Loan scheme was extended through the 2014 Budget announcement to 2020 to help 120,000 more households purchase a new build home.</p><p>The FirstBuy scheme was announced in the Budget 2011 to help support 10,000 first time buyers on the property ladder. The scheme was replaced in April 2013 with Help to Buy. There were 11,590 FirstBuy sales to the end of March 2014.</p><p>Since the end of last year, the Help to Buy: Mortgage Guarantee scheme is providing up to £12 billion of Government guarantees to support people to buy with a 5 per cent deposit, and over 2,500 homes have so far (by the end of January 2014) been brought through this route, and has helped lower interest rates for those with smaller deposits. The three Help to Buy schemes complement each other, and their success can be taken in the whole.</p><p><em>Private rented sector</em></p><p>The £1 billion Build to Rent programme, which provides development phase finance, is supporting new high quality development purpose built for private rent and is on track to create up to 10,000 new homes. The programme received £1.4 billion of bids under Round One, which is expected to support 15 developments which will provide over 2,600 homes across England in locations which include Durham, Liverpool, Manchester and London. Five contracts to the combined value of over £74.5 million have already been agreed which will deliver over 1,000 new homes for private rent; construction has already started in Southampton (Centenary Quay) and Manchester (Three Towers); more contracts will follow.</p><p>Bidding for Round Two of the Build to Rent Fund was significantly oversubscribed receiving 126 bids to the value of around £3 billion. 36 projects on the shortlist from Round Two are now going through a competitive due diligence process, with successful bids receiving funding to deliver thousands of new homes. A list of all shortlisted bids has been placed in the Library of the House. The shortlist is over-programmed, meaning not all shortlisted projects will receive funding. Shortlisting and due diligence are the first stages of the Build to Rent approval process. The Homes and Communities Agency will continue to work with bidders until exchange of contracts in order to ensure value for money for taxpayers.</p><p>In addition to direct funding, the Government's Private Rented Sector Taskforce is continuing to build the private rented sector as an investment market and have identified £10 billion of domestic and foreign investment available in the private rented sector.</p><p>The Private Rented Sector Guarantees scheme will provide a government guarantee for up to £3.5 billion debt (with further lending capacity held in reserve according to demand) for borrowers investing in new build private rented sector homes across the UK. The guarantees will use the UK Government's hard earned fiscal credibility to help lower the cost of borrowing and incentivise investment in the sector. DCLG is open for business to issue direct guarantees and is actively discussing potential applications with a number of borrowers looking to invest in large scale developments. On 18 March, we also launched a procurement inviting bids from the market to be our delivery partner for Private Rented Sector Housing Debt Guarantees, with the aim of maximizing take up of guarantees including for small and medium enterprises. My Department will be evaluating bids to perform the role in due course.</p><p><em>Infrastructure and development finance</em></p><p>The Get Britain Building investment fund has been provided over £500 million of finance to unlock smaller stalled sites. As at February 2014, it has helped kick start 11,893 new homes on stalled sites.</p><p>The Growing Places Fund is providing £770 million to deliver the infrastructure needed to unlock stalled schemes that will promoted economic growth, create jobs and build homes. The fund has been fully allocated to Local Enterprise Partnerships and the devolved administrations to fund local projects. Progress updates in June 2013 reported that £652 million of capital funding had been allocated to 305 projects across England. Local Enterprise Partnerships expect these projects to create 4,900 businesses, 94,000 jobs and 27,000 houses. A further update will be published in due course.</p><p>The £474 million Local Infrastructure Fund is helping to unlock large scale housing developments. To date, we have unlocked 15 sites capable of delivering almost 80,000 homes through a combination of financial and non-financial support. We are currently working to unlock a further 13 stalled schemes to deliver up to 40,000 new homes. In addition to the capital investment, we have made available £13 million of capacity funding to support local authorities in fulfilling their local housing ambitions.</p><p>The 2013 Autumn Statement also announced a further £1 billion to unlock development on large housing sites and a Prospectus inviting bids was published on 14 April. During the Easter Recess, we also published the Local Growth Fund (Housing Infrastructure) prospectus. This sets out the detail on how to access the £50 million part of the Local Growth Fund in 2015-16. It is designed to help speed up and restart housing developments between 250 and 1,499 units that have slowed down or stalled.</p><p>The 2014 Budget announced further funding for driving up housing supply including a £525 million Builders Finance Fund to provide development finance for small sites to support the construction of 15,000 new homes; the prospectus has also recently been published.</p><p>The Budget announced the intention to create an Urban Development Corporation for the Ebbsfleet area to accelerate the construction of a garden-city style development which will unlock up to 15,000 homes – with up to £200 million capital being made available. We have also published a prospectus to support further locally-led garden cities.</p><p>A new Estate Regeneration Fund of £150 million of recoverable investment will help kick start and accelerate the regeneration of some of our most deprived estates. And we will work with the Greater London Authority to support the regeneration of Brent Cross and unlock 11,000 homes at Barking Riverside.</p><p>We have also taken steps to scale back economically unrealistic Section 106 agreements, such as from the last Administration's housing bubble, which result in no housing development, no regeneration and no community benefits.</p><p><em>Self-build</em></p><p>The £30 million investment fund for Custom Build Homes is currently assessing loan funding of £22.6 million with the potential to deliver 270 units. At the 2014 Budget, we announced that the Government will consult on a new ‘Right to Build' to give self builders a right to a plot from councils, a new £150 million investment fund to help provide up to 10,000 service plots, and announced will we look to extend Help to Buy equity to custom build. We have also exempted self-build from the Community Infrastructure Levy and we are consulting on a similar policy change for Section 106 tariffs.</p><p><em>Empty homes</em></p><p>This Government has provided £235 million of funding which aims to bring up to 12,000 homes back into use by March 2015. This is part of a wider package of measures to get empty homes and empty buildings back into productive use, in contrast to the last Administration's policy of wholesale demolition. The numbers of empty properties in England have fallen to a 10-year low, and the number of long-term vacant properties has fallen by around a third since 2009.</p><p><em>Public sector land</em></p><p>The Public Sector Land Programme has identified land with capacity for over 100,000 homes which we aim to release to the private sector by March 2015. At the end of December 2013, we had released land capable of delivering 68,000 homes to be built.</p><p>Through the Strategic Land and Property Review we have identified scope to generate £5 billion of receipts from government land and property between 2015 and 2020. This will put land and property into the hands of those who can exploit them for commercial purposes – creating opportunities for housing and economic development.</p><p>This was part of a series of measures to support brownfield development, as outlined in more detail in the answer of 3 April 2014, <em>Official Report</em>, Column 780W.</p><p>There is more to do, but I hope this illustrates how this Government's long-term economic plan is helping build more houses, help people move on and up the housing ladder and clean up the mess left by the last Administration.</p><p> </p>
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-13T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-13T12:00:00.00Z
star this property creator
4023
star this property label Biography information for Karen Lumley more like this
star this property publisher
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property tabling member
4023
unstar this property label Biography information for Karen Lumley more like this
34369
star this property human indexable true more like this
star this property published true more like this
star this property registered interest false more like this
star this property answer date less than 2014-01-24more like thismore than 2014-01-24
star this property date less than 2014-01-22more like thismore than 2014-01-22
star this property date tabled less than 2014-01-22more like thismore than 2014-01-22
star this property ddp created less than 2014-01-22T23:40:40.613Zmore like thismore than 2014-01-22T23:40:40.613Z
star this property ddp modified less than 2015-02-07T01:20:13.603Zmore like thismore than 2015-02-07T01:20:13.603Z
star this property answering body
Department for Communities and Local Government more like this
star this property question status Tabled more like this
unstar this property answering dept id 7 more like this
star this property answering dept short name
star this property answering dept sort name
star this property house id 1 more like this
star this property identifier 184627 more like this
star this property legislature
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property parliament number 55 more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-14T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-14T12:00:00.00Z
star this property question text To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, what the average proportion of market rent of all affordable housing is in each London borough. more like this
star this property session
2013/14 more like this
star this property session number 3 more like this
star this property tabling member constituency Tooting more like this
star this property tabling member printed
Sadiq Khan more like this
star this property title House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2013/14 184627 more like this
star this property type
WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
star this property uin 184627 more like this
star this property version 1 more like this
star this property written parliamentary question type Ordinary more like this
star this property answer
answer
unstar this property is ministerial correction false more like this
unstar this property answer text <p> </p><p>I have placed in the Library of the House, a table showing affordable and social rents as a proportion of market rents, for each London borough.</p><p>The affordable rent model allows for more new affordable housing to be delivered with lower levels of taxpayer capital subsidy and by levering in more private investment. The programme is helping deliver £15 billion of private investment in new affordable housing over the current spending review, alongside £4.5 billion of public investment. Social rent and affordable rent go hand in hand; both help provide accommodation for those on low incomes.</p><p>As the National Audit Office has observed: “the Department selected the best delivery model open to it for the funds it had available” and “the Department has so far achieved its policy objective to maximise the number of homes delivered within the available grant funding” (National Audit Office, “Financial viability of the social housing sector: introducing the Affordable Homes Programme”, 4 July 2012, <em>HC465,</em> pp.6-7).</p><p>I note in his recent Fabian Society pamphlet, the rt. hon. Member has complained that affordable rent would result in rents of 80 per cent of market rents in London. Whilst it varies by borough, as the table shows, for example, affordable rent levels are 38 per cent of average local market rents in Camden, 48 per cent in Islington, 54 per cent in Southwark and 35 per cent in Westminster, reflecting local circumstances.</p><p>I also observe that the housing policy announced at the Labour Party Conference in October 2012 also endorsed the use of affordable rents to build new homes; albeit this point is frequently lost on many Labour hon. Members who proceed to attack the basic principle of affordable rent in allowing more new affordable homes to be built using taxpayer capital subsidy.</p><p> </p>
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-14T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-14T12:00:00.00Z
star this property creator
1577
star this property label Biography information for Sadiq Khan more like this
star this property publisher
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property tabling member
1577
unstar this property label Biography information for Sadiq Khan more like this
34374
star this property human indexable true more like this
star this property published true more like this
star this property registered interest false more like this
star this property answer date less than 2014-01-27more like thismore than 2014-01-27
star this property date less than 2014-01-22more like thismore than 2014-01-22
star this property date tabled less than 2014-01-22more like thismore than 2014-01-22
star this property ddp created less than 2014-01-22T23:40:41.020Zmore like thismore than 2014-01-22T23:40:41.020Z
star this property ddp modified less than 2015-02-07T01:20:17.520Zmore like thismore than 2015-02-07T01:20:17.520Z
star this property answering body
Department for Communities and Local Government more like this
star this property question status Tabled more like this
unstar this property answering dept id 7 more like this
star this property answering dept short name
star this property answering dept sort name
star this property house id 1 more like this
star this property identifier 184755 more like this
star this property legislature
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property parliament number 55 more like this
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-13T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-13T12:00:00.00Z
star this property question text To ask the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, how many families were based in temporary accommodation in (a) Chelmsford constituency and (b) Essex in each quarter of the last five years. more like this
star this property session
2013/14 more like this
star this property session number 3 more like this
star this property tabling member constituency Chelmsford more like this
star this property tabling member printed
Mr Simon Burns more like this
star this property title House of Commons Tabled Parliamentary Question 2013/14 184755 more like this
star this property type
WrittenParliamentaryQuestion
star this property uin 184755 more like this
star this property version 1 more like this
star this property written parliamentary question type NamedDay more like this
star this property answer
answer
unstar this property is ministerial correction false more like this
unstar this property answer text <p> </p><p><em>[Holding Reply: Monday 27 January 2014]</em></p><p>The Department does not collect constituency level data. A table has been placed in the Library of the House with data for Chelmsford City Council and Essex. To assist my rt. hon. Friend, I have provided quarterly data back for the last ten years; the table illustrates how there are fewer households in temporary accommodation than the average under the last Administration.</p><p>This Government has retained a strong homelessness safety net protected in law, supported by £470 million in the current Spending Review period to prevent and tackle homelessness, rough sleeping and repossessions. We are seeing this investment making an impact with households now spending on average 7 months less in temporary accommodation than at the start of 2010.</p><p>We have also made some changes to the rules under the Localism Act to enable local authorities to end the main homelessness duty by arranging an offer of suitable accommodation in the private rented sector. This means households are likely to spend less time in temporary accommodation waiting for social housing to become available.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>
star this property question first answered
less than 2014-05-13T12:00:00.00Zmore like thismore than 2014-05-13T12:00:00.00Z
star this property creator
46
star this property label Biography information for Sir Simon Burns more like this
star this property publisher
25259
star this property pref label House of Commons more like this
star this property tabling member
46
unstar this property label Biography information for Sir Simon Burns more like this