Bob Russell

Liberal Democrat - Former Member for Colchester

First elected: 1st May 1997

Left House: 30th March 2015 (Defeated)


Bob Russell is not a member of any APPGs
Defence Committee
24th Oct 2011 - 30th Mar 2015
Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority
23rd Jun 2010 - 30th Mar 2015
Administration Committee
26th Jul 2010 - 14th Nov 2011
Armed Forces Bill Committee
17th Jan 2011 - 8th Mar 2011
Opposition Whip (Commons)
10th May 2005 - 6th May 2010
Shadow Minister (Defence)
10th May 2005 - 6th May 2010
Panel of Chairs
12th Jan 2009 - 6th May 2010
Home Affairs Committee
24th Apr 2006 - 6th May 2010
Armed Forces Bill Committee
19th Dec 2005 - 9th May 2006
Regulatory Reform
12th Jul 2005 - 2nd May 2006
Home Affairs Committee
8th Jun 1998 - 12th Jul 2005
Draft Charities Bill (Joint Committee)
29th Apr 2004 - 15th Sep 2004


Division Voting information

Bob Russell has voted in 1820 divisions, and 71 times against the majority of their Party.

23 Feb 2015 - Serious Crime Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 12 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 29 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 201 Noes - 292
24 Nov 2014 - Recall of MPs Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 6 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 31 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 204 Noes - 125
22 Oct 2014 - Independent parliamentary standards authority - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 4 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 32 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 384 Noes - 18
26 Jun 2013 - High Speed Rail (Preparation) Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 39 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 37 Noes - 325
26 Jun 2013 - High Speed Rail (Preparation) Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 40 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 330 Noes - 27
5 Jun 2013 - Badger Cull - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 9 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 30 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 250 Noes - 299
5 Jun 2013 - Badger Cull - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 29 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 298 Noes - 237
8 Nov 2012 - House of Commons Administration and Savings Programme - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 18 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 13 Noes - 179
30 Oct 2012 - delegated legislation - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 40 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 275 Noes - 180
11 Jul 2012 - Sittings of the House - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 21 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 22 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 241 Noes - 256
11 Jul 2012 - Sittings of the House - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 19 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 25 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 267 Noes - 233
11 Jul 2012 - Sittings of the House - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 8 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 35 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 280 Noes - 184
11 Jul 2012 - Sittings of the House - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 14 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 26 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 205 Noes - 228
30 Apr 2012 - Sunday Trading (London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games) Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 35 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 273 Noes - 131
30 Apr 2012 - Sunday Trading (London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games) Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 35 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 272 Noes - 125
1 Mar 2012 - CPI/RPI Pensions Uprating - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 15 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 33 Noes - 232
21 Feb 2012 - Welfare Reform Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 9 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 36 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 316 Noes - 263
1 Feb 2012 - Welfare Reform Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 8 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 44 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 324 Noes - 265
1 Feb 2012 - Welfare Reform Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 4 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 43 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 328 Noes - 265
1 Feb 2012 - Welfare Reform Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 12 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 37 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 310 Noes - 268
1 Feb 2012 - Welfare Reform Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 4 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 45 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 318 Noes - 257
19 Oct 2011 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 33 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 306 Noes - 95
13 Oct 2011 - Procedure Committee Reports - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 3 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 22 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 63 Noes - 206
13 Jul 2011 - Youth Employment - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 16 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 241 Noes - 35
10 Feb 2011 - Voting by Prisoners - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 4 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 9 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 234 Noes - 22
9 Dec 2010 - Higher Education Fees - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 21 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 27 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 323 Noes - 302
9 Dec 2010 - Higher Education Fees - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 21 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 27 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 323 Noes - 302
30 Nov 2010 - School Sports Funding - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 2 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 45 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 232 Noes - 304
9 Nov 2010 - Housing Benefit - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 46 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 258 Noes - 319
1 Nov 2010 - Parliamentary Voting System and Constituencies Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 9 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 42 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 257 Noes - 315
13 Oct 2010 - Superannuation Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 6 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 39 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 309 Noes - 242
7 Sep 2010 - Superannuation Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 4 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 42 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 326 Noes - 244
7 Sep 2010 - Superannuation Bill (Programme) - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 7 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 40 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 307 Noes - 244
13 Jul 2010 - Finance Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 45 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 21 Noes - 316
13 Jul 2010 - Finance Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 44 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 243 Noes - 321
13 Jul 2010 - Finance Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 2 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 47 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 321 Noes - 246
28 Jun 2010 - Capital Gains Tax (Rates) - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 2 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 50 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 346 Noes - 270
4 Mar 2010 - Chair (Terminology) - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 6 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 47 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 206 Noes - 90
27 Jan 2010 - Dementia Services - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 3 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 3 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 162 Noes - 275
12 Oct 2009 - Health Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 2 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 42 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 180 Noes - 288
16 Mar 2009 - Use of the Chamber (United Kingdom Youth Parliament) - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 2 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 26 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 210 Noes - 22
16 Mar 2009 - Use of the Chamber (United Kingdom Youth Parliament) - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 2 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 30 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 21 Noes - 207
16 Mar 2009 - Use of the Chamber (United Kingdom Youth Parliament) - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 2 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 30 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 0 Noes - 0
12 Nov 2008 - Deferred Division - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 2 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 48 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 430 Noes - 54
22 Oct 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 23 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 25 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 206 Noes - 298
22 Oct 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 21 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 30 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 194 Noes - 306
22 Oct 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 18 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 31 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 183 Noes - 308
22 Oct 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 16 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 30 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 355 Noes - 129
3 Jul 2008 - Members’ Salaries - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 13 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 25 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 123 Noes - 224
20 May 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 13 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 36 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 222 Noes - 290
20 May 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 3 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 48 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 71 Noes - 393
20 May 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 3 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 48 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 84 Noes - 387
20 May 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 13 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 42 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 190 Noes - 332
20 May 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 27 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 28 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 173 Noes - 309
20 May 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 23 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 32 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 233 Noes - 304
19 May 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 26 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 29 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 223 Noes - 286
19 May 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 16 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 40 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 149 Noes - 318
19 May 2008 - Human Fertilisation and Embryology Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 22 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 32 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 200 Noes - 293
19 Feb 2008 - Banking (Special Provisions) Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 4 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 293 Noes - 167
11 Dec 2007 - European Affairs - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 2 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 2 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 276 Noes - 17
25 Oct 2007 - Modernisation of the House of Commons - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 5 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 5 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 36 Noes - 74
26 Jun 2007 - Off-Road Vehicles (Registration) Bill [Money] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 12 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 20 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 197 Noes - 165
5 Jun 2007 - Termination of Pregnancy (Counselling and Miscellaneous Provisions) - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 9 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 28 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 107 Noes - 182
28 Mar 2007 - Communications Allowance - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 19 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 26 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 283 Noes - 188
19 Mar 2007 - UK Borders Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and against the House
One of 4 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 29 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 310 Noes - 100
14 Mar 2007 - Contraception and Abortion (Parental Information) - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 3 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 30 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 87 Noes - 159
1 Nov 2006 - Legislative Process - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted No - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 17 Liberal Democrat No votes vs 36 Liberal Democrat Aye votes
Tally: Ayes - 122 Noes - 354
31 Oct 2006 - Termination of Pregnancy - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 9 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 34 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 108 Noes - 187
9 Oct 2006 - Road Safety Bill [Lords] - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 3 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 3 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 164 Noes - 290
18 Jul 2006 - Government of Wales Bill - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and against the House
One of 1 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 2 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 0 Noes - 0
5 Jul 2006 - Ambulances (County Durham) - View Vote Context
Bob Russell voted Aye - against a party majority and in line with the House
One of 21 Liberal Democrat Aye votes vs 26 Liberal Democrat No votes
Tally: Ayes - 409 Noes - 53
View All Bob Russell Division Votes

All Debates

Speeches made during Parliamentary debates are recorded in Hansard. For ease of browsing we have grouped debates into individual, departmental and legislative categories.

Sparring Partners
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton (Conservative)
Foreign Secretary
(54 debate interactions)
John Bercow (Speaker)
(46 debate interactions)
View All Sparring Partners
Department Debates
Ministry of Defence
(145 debate contributions)
Leader of the House
(102 debate contributions)
Department for Education
(88 debate contributions)
Cabinet Office
(63 debate contributions)
View All Department Debates
Legislation Debates
Bob Russell has not made any spoken contributions to legislative debate
View all Bob Russell's debates

Colchester Petitions

e-Petitions are administered by Parliament and allow members of the public to express support for a particular issue.

If an e-petition reaches 10,000 signatures the Government will issue a written response.

If an e-petition reaches 100,000 signatures the petition becomes eligible for a Parliamentary debate (usually Monday 4.30pm in Westminster Hall).

Bob Russell has not participated in any petition debates

Latest EDMs signed by Bob Russell

25th March 2015
Bob Russell signed this EDM as a sponsor on Wednesday 25th March 2015

MALDIVES GOVERNMENT AND THE RULE OF LAW

Tabled by: Fiona Bruce (Conservative - Congleton)
That this House notes with alarm the series of events that have led to Maldivian President Mohamed Nasheed being removed from office, arrested, convicted of terrorism charges and sentenced to 13 years in prison; further notes the widespread shock at images of President Nasheed being dragged along the ground into …
3 signatures
(Most recent: 25 Mar 2015)
Signatures by party:
Conservative: 2
25th March 2015
Bob Russell signed this EDM as a sponsor on Wednesday 25th March 2015

ABUSES AGAINST YEZIDI WOMEN AND MINORITIES BY ISIL

Tabled by: Ann Clwyd (Labour - Cynon Valley)
That this House remains extremely concerned about the treatment of minorities in Iraq and parts of Syria by ISIL (also known as Daesh), and in particular the persecution of Yezidi women who have been brutally targeted since August 2014 and continue to be held in ISIL captivity in large numbers …
5 signatures
(Most recent: 25 Mar 2015)
Signatures by party:
Conservative: 1
Labour: 1
View All Bob Russell's signed Early Day Motions

Commons initiatives

These initiatives were driven by Bob Russell, and are more likely to reflect personal policy preferences.

MPs who are act as Ministers or Shadow Ministers are generally restricted from performing Commons initiatives other than Urgent Questions.


Bob Russell has not been granted any Urgent Questions

6 Adjournment Debates led by Bob Russell

Wednesday 14th January 2015
Wednesday 12th December 2012
Tuesday 19th July 2011
Tuesday 10th May 2011
Friday 19th November 2010

1 Bill introduced by Bob Russell


A Bill to make provision to reduce the permitted blood alcohol level for drivers from 80 mg per 100 ml of blood to 50 mg; to empower the police to suspend an individual’s driving licence pending assessment of his or her suitability to drive; and for connected purposes

Commons - 20%

Last Event - 1st Reading: House Of Commons
Tuesday 22nd November 2011

Bob Russell has not co-sponsored any Bills in the current parliamentary sitting


Latest 50 Written Questions

(View all written questions)
Written Questions can be tabled by MPs and Lords to request specific information information on the work, policy and activities of a Government Department
13 Other Department Questions
22nd Jan 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, what progress has been made in implementing the recommendations of the Richard review of apprenticeships.

Employers of all sizes are fully engaged in Trailblazers, designing new apprenticeship standards to meet their skill needs. Over 1000 employers, in over 75 sectors, are already involved in Trailblazers. 73 new apprenticeship standards have been approved and a further 100 are in development. The first 300 apprentices training to the new standards started in September 2014.

The funding model currently being trialled with Trailblazer apprenticeships provides £2 of Government support for every £1 spent by employers on training. Extra payments are also available for smaller businesses; taking on a 16 – 18 year old; and on completion of an apprenticeship.

Giving employers’ control of apprenticeship funding is a core and non-negotiable part of our reforms. Following feedback to the Technical Consultation, further work is being done before a final decision is made on which funding mechanism will be taken forward.

17th Dec 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will make it his policy to provide guidance for the protection of consumers on the practices of cash for property businesses so as to ensure that sellers are fully aware of the financial implications.

There are government funded consumer websites such as the Money Advice Service and Citizens Advice that provide advice and guidance to home sellers who wish to sell their property quickly and may be considering businesses offering a quick sale service.

In 2013, the Office for Fair Trading published a report on quick house sales and as a result targeted advice and tips were developed for those considering this type of sale. Businesses involved in the quick sale market are subject to consumer laws such as the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008 (CPRs) and may be subject to sector specific legislation such as the Estate Agency Act 1979 (EAA), depending on the nature of the work they undertake.

30th Oct 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will issue guidance to higher and further education institutions on implementing a replacement programme to introduce LED lighting in their buildings.

Higher Education Institutions are autonomous and responsible for managing their own estates.

Since 2008 the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) has provided £61 million in repayable grants to HE institutions to support projects which save money and reduce carbon emissions. A further £34m is being made available over the next two years.

Decisions on which institutions will benefit from this support will be announced early in the New Year. A large number of the project applications are for LED lighting.

FE colleges, as autonomous institutions, will make their own decisions on embracing sustainability principles across their estates. Criteria for funding from the Department included requirements for projects to achieve high levels of environmental performance.

30th Oct 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change, if he will make it his policy to implement a replacement programme to introduce LED lighting throughout his Department's buildings and sites; if he will estimate the proportion of lighting in his Department which is LED; and if he will make a statement.

It is the policy of the Department of Energy and Climate Change to run its estate as energy efficiently as possible and make significant reductions in its energy use. This is done through a range of measures which are carefully assessed for their feasibility and cost effectiveness. Using this approach DECC has installed LED lighting throughout most of its headquarters building, 3 Whitehall Place. It is estimated that two thirds of the building space directly managed by DECC already has LED lighting, with more being installed over the coming months.

30th Oct 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, if he will make it his policy to implement a replacement programme to introduce LED lighting throughout his Department's buildings and sites; if he will estimate the proportion of lighting in his Department which is LED; and if he will make a statement.

Currently the Department are investigating replacing existing stairwell lighting at 1 Victoria Street with LED lighting. Unfortunately the department cannot afford to switch all lighting to LED due to the large investment needed to do this.

However lighting is gradually being upgraded to LED throughout the estate such as the recent Conference Centre lighting project and LED lighting has also been introduced to lift cars and the underground car park.

Another key factor to address is the lease expiry on buildings as the department do not own the buildings it occupies, a clear payback must be achieved before the lease expires. In the current economic climate the department faces significant funding cuts and must prioritise spending accordingly. This has resulted in a limited expenditure on estate services and a prioritisation on providing and maintaining key services.

I would not be able to estimate the proportion of LED lighting without carrying out a comprehensive survey across all sites which would not be time or cost effective.

13th Oct 2014
To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, on what criteria additional staff allowances other than for staff sickness or maternity leave are given to hon. Members.

The information requested falls within the responsibility of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. I have asked IPSA to reply.

Letter from Marcial Boo, October 2014:

As Chief Executive of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking about the criteria for additional staffing expenditure budget.

The MPs’ Scheme of Business Costs and Expenses sets out the criteria for contingency funding in Chapter 10. We consider applications for additional funding for staffing or non-staffing costs on a case-by-case basis and take into account the following criteria:

  • whether there are exceptional circumstances warranting additional support;
  • whether the MP could reasonably have been expected to take any action to avoid the circumstances which gave rise to the expenditure or liability; and
  • whether the MP's performance of his or her parliamentary functions would be significantly impaired by a refusal of the claim.

13th Oct 2014
To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, what comparative estimate the Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority has made of the cost to the public purse of providing accommodation for hon. Members' staff in (a) constituency offices and (b) the parliamentary estate.

The information requested falls within the responsibility of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. I have asked IPSA to reply.

Letter from Marcial Boo, October 2014:

As Chief Executive of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking about office accommodation for MPs' staff.

We have not conducted such a comparative estimate.

Under the MPs’ Scheme of Business Costs and Expenses, MPs may choose where to locate their staff, based on how they wish to carry out their parliamentary functions. If an MP chooses to base some or all of his or her staff in the constituency, the costs associated with office rental may be charged to the MP’s Office Costs Expenditure budget (administered and paid for by IPSA). Costs associated with provision of an office on the Parliamentary estate are borne by the House of Commons centrally.

7th Jul 2014
To ask the Deputy Prime Minister, what guidance the Minister of State for Cities and Constitution has given to local enterprise partnerships on informing (a) district councils and (b) hon. Members about Growth Deal schemes before briefing the media; and if he will make a statement.

Growth Deals are negotiated between the Government and Local Enterprise Partnerships. It was for every Local Enterprise Partnership to determine who to contact in advance of the announcement of their Deal.

I wrote to all hon. Members with constituencies in England on the morning of 7 July, the day of the Growth Deals announcement, setting out full details of the Growth Deal in their area.

To ask the Deputy Prime Minister, what progress he has made on identifying areas not included in the first or second wave of the City Deals programme as eligible for subsequent initiatives.

Building on the successes of City Deals, all 39 Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) have been invited to develop Strategic Economic Plans to set out what needs to be done to boost growth in their area.

As part of each Strategic Economic Plan, a Growth Deal bid is being developed for negotiation with central government for the allocation of the Local Growth Fund.

The Local Growth Fund will be at least £2 billion a year from 2015/16. As a result of this, all parts of England are able to access and benefit from this initiative.

To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, what criteria the IPSA Contingency Panel used to grant uplifts to hon. Members' staffing expenditure budgets in (a) 2012-13 and (b) 2013-14.

The information requested falls within the responsibility of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. I have asked IPSA to reply.

Letter from Andrew McDonald, 3/10/2014 2013:

As Chief Executive of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking about IPSA's Contingency Panel.

The rules concerning the Contingency Panel are set out at Paragraph 10.12 of the MPs' Scheme of Business Costs and Expenses.

They set out that in relation to each application the Contingency Panel will consider:

a. whether there are exceptional circumstances warranting additional support;

b. whether the MP could reasonably have been expected to take any action to avoid the circumstances which gave rise to the expenditure or liability; and

c. whether the MP's performance of parliamentary functions will be significantly impaired by a refusal of the claim.

Given the significant increase in staffing budgets made in 2012/13, we have not provided contingency funding for MPs' staffing expenditure budgets on the basis of increased casework in 2013/14.

To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, what the (a) highest and (b) lowest uplift allocated to hon. Members' staff expenditure budgets was in (i) 2012-13 and (ii) 2013-14 to date.

The information requested falls within the responsibility of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. I have asked IPSA to reply.

Letter from Andrew McDonald, 3/10/2014 2013:

As Chief Executive of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking about IPSA's Contingency Panel.

In 2012/13 the highest uplift approved by the Contingency Panel was £13,909 and the lowest was £600.

In 2013/14 to date, the highest has been £17,900 and the lowest £600.

These figures do not include other uplifts to provide cover for staff on maternity, paternity, adoption and long term sick leave.

To ask the hon. Member for Broxbourne, representing the Speaker's Committee for the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, how many staff were employed by the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) at its London headquarters on 1 June 2010; and of those employees how many are currently employed by IPSA.

The information requested falls within the responsibility of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority. I have asked IPSA to reply.

Letter from Paul Hayes, May 2014:

As Chief Executive of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, I have been asked to reply to your Parliamentary Question asking about the number of staff employed by IPSA.

The below data include individuals on permanent and fixed-term contracts and on secondment. Data are not available for temporary staff, who in June 2010 made up the majority of our workforce.

Number

Employed by IPSA on 1 June 2010

20

of which still employed

6

30th Oct 2014
To ask the Attorney General, if he will make it his policy to implement a replacement programme to introduce LED lighting throughout the Law Officers' Departments' buildings and sites; if he will estimate the proportion of lighting in the Law Officers' Departments which is LED; and if he will make a statement.

The Law Officers’ Departments are committed to reducing their energy usage and where it is cost effective to do would consider replacing lighting with LED systems. However there are currently no plans to implement a replacement programme to introduce LED lighting throughout the Law Officers' Departments' buildings and sites, most of which are leasehold.

At present, neither of the buildings currently occupied by the Attorney General’s Office or Serious Fraud Office have any LED lighting, and the Treasury Solicitor’s Department and HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate only have LED lighting in the lift lobby area of their main building.

The CPS have replaced the lighting on one floor of their headquarters building with an LED system, but do not hold a central record of the technical specifications of the lighting systems in use in all of its buildings. To verify the details of all lighting systems would incur a disproportionate cost.

The Law Officers’ Departments reduced CO2 emissions by 29% in 2012/13 exceeding the Greening Government Commitment (GGC) target to reduce CO2 emissions by 25% by 2014/15 compared to 2009/10.

30th Oct 2014
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, if he will make it his policy to implement a replacement programme to intriduce LED lighting throughout buildings and sites used by (a) the Cabinet Office, (b) the Deputy Prime Minister's Office and (c) 10 Downing Street; if he will estimate the proportion of lighting in such sites which is LED; and if he will make a statement.

The Prime Minister’s Office and the Deputy Prime Ministers Office are integral parts of the Cabinet Office. The Cabinet Office estate is committed to improving the energy efficiency of its buildings. The estate incorporates buildings of different ages and types that require a selection of lighting solutions which must be assessed on a case by case basis. LED lighting does not always provide the most sustainable option in all scenarios.

Current implementation of LED lighting is approximately 5-10% across the entire estate. However, its use is increasing as existing lighting comes to the end of its effective life. Downing Street has implemented many of these new products in recent upgrades to some State Rooms, corridors and offices.

In addition to ensuring that the most appropriate lighting solution is selected across the estate, the Cabinet Office also incorporates lighting control mechanisms via presence detection and daylight sensors into its core buildings. These installations form part of the overall strategy to reduce electricity consumption estate wide as part of the wider Greening Government Commitment. Currently the estate as a whole has reduced electricity consumption by 34% from an 09/10 baseline

30th Oct 2014
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how often (a) pneumococcal disease and (b) pneumococcal community-acquired pneumonia was mentioned on death certificates in England and Wales in each of the last 15 years.

The information requested falls within the responsibility of the UK Statistics Authority. I have asked the Authority to reply.

8th Sep 2014
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, what guidance he issues to companies delivering publicly-funded projects on taking the national interest into account when awarding contracts and sub-contracts.

Any such requirements would be included in relevant contracts rather than in guidance.

16th Jul 2014
To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, when he plans to make an announcement on recommendations relating to the award of the National Defence Medal.

Sir John Holmes’ further work to implement the recommendations set out in his Military Medals Review included a review of the case for some form of National Defence Medal, to recognise all military service. As Sir John noted in his report of July 2012, the National Defence Medal is an issue of national significance which would require a broad political and public consensus and consideration by the government as a whole, in consultation with other political parties and concerned organisations.

8th Dec 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, what recent discussions he has had with the Imperial War Museum on proposals to close that museum's library; and if he will make a statement.

Although the Ministry of Defence and Imperial War Museum work closely together on various projects, the Ministry of Defence does not directly fund or support any of the Imperial War Museum’s activities; the Museum receives its core Grant in Aid through the Department for Culture Media and Sport, as a Non Departmental Public Body. The IWM is currently in discussion with the Department about its programme of change, including changes to how core collections including books are accessed at IWM London. A programme of digitisation of these core collections is in train so that those across the UK and further afield who are not able to visit the museum sites in person, can engage with IWM’s subject matter and collection. The IWM is also looking at a number of options around access to its collections. All accessioned collection items, and some (non-accessioned) books, ephemera, will remain at or under the museum’s direct management and will continue to be accessible by appointment. However the option of a possible transfer to other institutions of some of the non-accessioned materials currently held in the library which are not part of its core collection has been raised, so that these might be accessible elsewhere. Throughout discussions the IWM has remained fully committed to maintaining its presence in Manchester, London and Cambridgeshire.

30th Oct 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport, if he will make it his policy to implement a replacement programme to introduce LED lighting throughout his Department's buildings and sites; if he will estimate the proportion of lighting in his Department which is LED; and if he will make a statement.

DCMS occupies two buildings – 100 Parliament Street and Queen’s Yard.

100 Parliament Street is occupied under an agreement with HMRC, who have responsibility for the building services, including lighting.

Queen's Yard is a leased building and houses the Government Art Collection. There are no plans to install LED lighting on this site.

7th Jan 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, what aspects of nineteenth century and twentieth century (a) British and (b) world history are mandatory in the history curriculum in each key stage.

The requirements for the mandatory history curriculum in maintained schools in England are available online at:

www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-history-programmes-of-study.

A copy of this document is also available in the House Library.

Maintained schools must teach 11-14 year-olds the challenges for Britain, Europe and the wider world from 1901 to the present day. In addition to studying the Holocaust, this can include the First World War and the Peace Settlement, and the Second World War and the wartime leadership of Winston Churchill.

7th Jan 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will make it her policy that study of the (a) First World War and (b) Second World War is made mandatory in the history curriculum.

The requirements for the mandatory history curriculum in maintained schools in England are available online at:

www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-curriculum-in-england-history-programmes-of-study.

A copy of this document is also available in the House Library.

Maintained schools must teach 11-14 year-olds the challenges for Britain, Europe and the wider world from 1901 to the present day. In addition to studying the Holocaust, this can include the First World War and the Peace Settlement, and the Second World War and the wartime leadership of Winston Churchill.

30th Oct 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will issue guidance to schools and sixth form colleges that they should implement a replacement programme to introduce LED lighting in their buildings.

The Department for Education has no plans at present to issue guidance to schools and sixth form colleges to replace all lighting in schools with LED lights. The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) together with the Carbon Trust and the Energy Saving Trust take the lead for government on research and publication of advice on LEDs. DECC are currently funding research and product development of LED lighting technology.

Departmental specifications quote the guidance on lighting design for schools produced by the Society of Light and Lighting (SLL), specifically Lighting for education, Lighting Guide No 5, published in 2011 (LG5). The Department worked with SLL to produce LG5 which replaced the Department’s Building Bulleting 90 Lighting Design for Schools in 2011. SLL has also published Guidelines for Specification of LED Lighting Products, 2012.

30th Oct 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will make it her policy to implement a replacement programme to introduce LED lighting throughout her Department's buildings and sites; if she will estimate the proportion of lighting in her Department which is LED; and if she will make a statement.

The Department for Education’s policy for new and replacement lighting is to consider the installation of LEDs, where appropriate, based on an assessment of suitability for the work setting and of the whole-life cost of the equipment.

The Department has made significant improvements to the energy efficiency and cost effectiveness of lighting across its estate through the introduction of LED lighting and compact fluorescent lamps. We have also improved the performance of our lighting systems by installing and actively maintaining passive infra-red and daylight level sensors.

The Department continues to review opportunities to install LED lighting across its estate to further reduce energy use, carbon emissions and ongoing maintenance costs.

Approximately 7% of lighting within the Department’s buildings is LED.

21st Jul 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, if she will make it her policy to allow a relaxation of up to four additional places in the maximum number of pupils in an infant class in areas where the demand exceeds the number of places available at the local catchment area school.

There are no plans to raise the infant class size limit of 30 pupils per school teacher. The Department for Education believes that smaller infant classes have a positive effect on the progress of younger pupils.

However, there are already a small number of prescribed exceptions where the limit of 30 pupils per teacher can lawfully be exceeded. These exceptions exist to protect the most vulnerable children such as children in care, children with a statement of special educational needs or children who move into an area where there is no other suitable school place available for them.

17th Jul 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Education, whether her Department is working with the History of Parliament Trust and the publishers St James's House on a publication to be published in 2015 to mark 750 years of Parliament; what reports she has received of schools being asked to contribute sponsorship towards that publication; and if she will make a statement.

The Department for Education is not involved with this publication, nor have we received any reports from schools regarding any such requests.

The new national curriculum for history, to be taught in maintained schools from September 2014, includes key developments relating to the history of Parliament ranging from Magna Carta and the emergence of Parliament to women’s suffrage in the early twentieth century. In addition, as part of the new national curriculum for citizenship, secondary age pupils should be taught about the development of the political system of democratic government in the United Kingdom, including the roles of citizens, Parliament and the monarch. Schools are free to choose which resources they use to teach the curriculum; the work being carried out by the Trust to educate young people about the history of Parliament through teaching resources and school competitions will help schools in teaching these key developments in British history.

17th Dec 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she will bring forward proposals to amend restrictions on entry to the UK by animals to enable competition horses from Iraq to compete in the UK.

Imports of equidae (horses, donkeys etc.) from third countries into the UK are governed by Council Directive 2009/156/EC. This lays down the animal health conditions concerning the movement and import from third countries. Commission Decision 2004/211/EC (as amended) establishes a list of third countries from which imports of equidae are authorised as satisfying these conditions.

Iraq is not on the list of authorised third countries. In order for it to be included, Iraq would need to demonstrate to the European Commission that it can satisfy the conditions contained in the Directive.

30th Oct 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if she will make it her policy to implement a replacement programme to introduce LED lighting throughout her Department's buildings and sites; if she will estimate the proportion of lighting in her Department which is LED; and if she will make a statement.

LED lighting is considered as part of all building refurbishment projects and installed where investment over the projected life time of the building demonstrates value for money.

In 2011, Core Defra’s HQ building, Nobel House, was refurbished and LED lighting installed, with Passive Infra-Red (PIR) daylight and motion sensors.

Core Defra’s properties at York and Alnwick were refurbished in 2009 with energy efficient T5 fluorescent tube lighting with PIR daylight and motion sensors. LED lighting for office spaces was not considered value for money at that time. Future projects at these properties would consider upgrades to LED lighting.

The Core Defra estate has an estimated 40% LED lighting.

1st Sep 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, what recent estimate she has made of the proportion of the UK's food demand met by food grown in the UK; and what that figure was in (a) 1984, (b) 1994 and (c) 2004.

The proportion of UK food consumption that was produced in the UK was 63% in 1994 and 53% in 2004. The detailed trade data used in this calculation is not available before 1988.

The latest available figures for 2013 give the proportion as 53%.

A full time series from 1988 to 2013 is available in Chapter 14 (table 14.5) of the publication ‘Agriculture in the United Kingdom’ at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/agriculture-in-the-united-kingdom.

An alternative and frequently used measure is the UK production to supply ratio for indigenous type food. This compares total national production with production excluding exports and including imports. It is not directly comparable with the domestic food consumption proportion above because it includes food that the UK exported which could have been consumed domestically. The UK production to supply ratio for indigenous type food for 2013 was 73%. ‘Indigenous type food’ refers to types which can be produced in the UK on a commercially viable basis.

A time series of the production to supply ratio is also available in table 14.1 and chart 14.5 in 'Agriculture in the United Kingdom’.

19th Mar 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what proportion of funding to the Thailand Burma Border Consortium was provided by her Department in each of the last five years; and if she will make a statement.

The Department for International Development has provided the following proportions of funding to the Border Consortium (formerly called the Thailand Burma Border Consortium) over the last five years: 2010, 5%; 2011, 5%; 2012, 10%; 2013, 10%; 2014, 11%.

19th Mar 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, what funding her Department provided to support refugees from Burma living in refugee camps in Thailand in each of the last five years; and if she will make a statement.

Through The Border Consortium, the Department for International Development has provided the following support to refugees from Burma living in refugee camps in Thailand over the last five years: 2010, £1,085,000; 2011, £1,085,000; 2012, £2,071,250; 2013, £1,800,000; 2014, £1,800,000.

11th Mar 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, if she will make it her policy that the declaration of the UNICEF Heads of Government meeting in September 2015 should prioritise the ending of abuse, exploitation, trafficking and all forms of violence and torture against children; and if she will make a statement.

The UK Government fully supports efforts to end all forms of violence against children through its humanitarian and development programmes. Peaceful societies, good governance and the rule of law are all important development priorities for the UK and are central to protecting children globally. DFID is supporting programming in conflict-affected countries to assist and protect children, working with mandated child protection agencies including UNICEF. In Syria and the wider region more than £800 million in humanitarian aid is helping those affected, for example through the No Lost Generation Initiative which is providing education and psychosocial support to children to protect them from violence, abuse and exploitation.

In September Heads of Government will meet at the UN General Assembly to agree a Post-2015 development framework. The UK Government strongly supports goal 16 on peaceful and inclusive societies, which has a specific target on ending all forms of violence against children.

30th Oct 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for International Development, if she will make it her policy to implement a replacement programme to introduce LED lighting throughout her Department's buildings and sites; if she will estimate the proportion of lighting in her Department which is LED; and if she will make a statement.

The estimated proportion of LED lighting at both UK sites is 5%. LEDs have already been installed on a trial basis to monitor reductions in Greenhouse Gas emissions and also cost savings. If savings prove significant then we will consider rolling out more LED lighting across the organisation.

1st Dec 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what estimate he has made of how many drivers of UK-registered vehicles will not pay the Dartford Crossing toll following changes to the payment arrangements; what estimate he has made of the potential annual loss of revenue from such non-payment; and what steps will be taken to recover payment from drivers of UK-registered vehicles who do not pay the toll.

Enforcing the charge and tackling evasion, where road users do not pay the charge, will be an important component of the Dart Charge scheme. The new Dartford Charging Scheme Order enables the Highways Agency to enforce the Dartford road user charge through penalty charges and recovery processes.

1st Dec 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what estimate he has made of how many drivers of overseas-registered vehicles will not pay the Dartford Crossing toll following changes to the payment arrangements; what estimate he has made of the potential annual loss of revenue from such non-payment; and what steps will be taken to recover payment from drivers of overseas-registered vehicles who do not pay the toll.

The Highways Agency estimates that non-UK registered vehicles will account for around 3 out of every 100 crossings and the majority of these are expected to comply with the charge.  The Highways Agency are serious about tackling non-compliance and will use effective penalty and recovery processes that have been proven elsewhere, such as the London congestion charging and Dublin M50 toll schemes.  The new Dartford Charging Scheme Order enables the Agency to enforce the Dartford Crossing road user charge through penalty charges and recovery processes.

A European debt recovery agency, with access to a variety of foreign vehicle databases, will also be used to pursue and recover outstanding charges from non-UK vehicles that evade paying the Crossing charge.

22nd Oct 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will make it his policy to issue guidance to (a) Network Rail and (b) train operating companies that they should implement a replacement programme to introduce LED lighting in their premises.

Network Rail is responsible for managing its estates in an operationally- effective and cost-efficient way. The choice of lighting used in Network Rail’s premises is an operational matter for the company.

The Department has no locus to mandate the type of lighting that train operating companies use on their premises. Many depots are owned by the train manufacturers rather than by Network Rail or the train operators, as the contracts for the rolling stock often include maintenance. At stations, when lighting systems are due for renewal, they would normally be replaced with the current modern equivalent standard of lighting.

22nd Oct 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will make it his policy to implement a replacement programme to introduce LED lights throughout his Department's buildings and sites; if he will estimate the proportion of lighting in his Department which is LED; and if he will make a statement.

The Department for Transport will consider installation of LED lights during major refurbishment projects where cost effective to do so. Information on the proportion of lighting which is currently LED is not centrally recorded and could only be provided at disproportionate cost.

1st Sep 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will assess the potential merits of lowering the assumed walking speed of 1.2 metres per second used for calculating crossing times for pedestrians; and if he will publish the findings of that assessment.

Local councils are responsible for setting pedestrian crossing timings with reference to the Department for Transport’s guidance walking speed of 1.2 metres per second given in Local Transport Note 1/95: ‘The Assessment of Pedestrian Crossings’, Local Transport Note 2/95: ‘The Design of Pedestrian Crossings’, and Traffic Advisory Leaflet 5/05: ‘Pedestrian Facilities at Signal-controlled Junctions’.

The Department recommends that where a crossing may be used by a large number of older people or those with mobility issues, for example outside residential care homes, this should be taken into account when setting timings.

The Department expects to bring the successor to the Traffic Signs Regulations and General Directions, which will include all pedestrian crossing types, into force in 2015 and once that is complete will consider the need to update existing guidance.

2nd Feb 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, what estimate he has made of how many residents of the British Overseas Territories in receipt of UK state pensions have had those pensions frozen.

There are 14 British Overseas Territories: Anguilla; Bermuda; the British Antarctic Territory; the British Indian Ocean Territory; the British Virgin Islands; Cayman Islands; Falkland Islands; Gibraltar; Montserrat; the Pitcairn Islands; St. Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha; South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands; the Sovereign Base Areas on Cyprus (Akrotiri and Dhekelia); and the Turks and Caicos Islands.

Information on the Overseas Territories in which UK state pensions are paid and the number of cases in payment is available at: http://tabulation-tool.dwp.gov.uk/100pc/sp/cccountry/cnage/a_carate_r_cccountry_c_cnage_may14.html

The tabulation tool distinguishes between those countries where the state pension is up-rated and those countries where the state pension is ‘frozen’. Up-rated state pensions are payable to people living in Bermuda, Gibraltar and the Sovereign Base Areas on Cyprus. However it is possible that in some cases state pensions paid in countries where the state pension is ‘frozen’ will be up-rated, for example when someone is only visiting the Territory.

30th Oct 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, if he will make it his policy to implement a replacement programme to introduce LED lighting throughout his Department's buildings and sites; if he will estimate the proportion of lighting in his Department which is LED; and if he will make a statement.

DWP outsourced the ownership and management of its estate, including related facilities management to our accommodation partners Telereal Trillium (TT) as part of a 20 year PFI contract, known as PRIME. Under this PFI arrangement DWP leases back fully serviced accommodation and as such when lighting is due for renewal the choice of replacement is made by TT’s technical experts rather than DWP. TT normal practice, when replacing lighting is to renew with highly energy efficient fluorescent lighting.

The widespread use of this energy efficient fluorescent lighting combined with the high cost of fitting LED lights means a widespread programme of fitting LED lights is not considered cost effective by TT and DWP.

Although a small number of LED lights are fitted at some sites, it is not possible to estimate the proportion as TT do not maintain central records of individual light fittings.

21st Jul 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many outstanding investigations for benefit fraud there were of over (a) three, (b) six or (c) 12 months duration in each region and constituent part of the UK on the latest date for which figures are available; and if he will make a statement.

This information can only be provided by examining individual investigation files at disproportionate time and cost.

Mark Harper
Secretary of State for Transport
21st Jul 2014
To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, when he last met Jobcentre Plus to discuss investigations into benefit fraud.

It would not be appropriate for the Secretary of State to discuss individual operational investigations. He has had several meetings to discuss the Department’s approach to targeting fraud and error. His last meeting was on 12 May 2014.

Mark Harper
Secretary of State for Transport
11th Mar 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 15 December 2014 to Question 217335, what the causes of these incidents were; and if he will make a statement.

Table 1 and Table 2 illustrate the number of incidents reported to the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) where the incident report contained keywords indicating multiple pregnancies. It is important to note that the inclusion of these keywords may not always indicate the incident directly affected a multiple pregnancy; for example, reference in the incident report may be made to previous pregnancies. The harm reported may relate to the mother or to one or more foetuses/infants. The table is attached.

Information on the specific causes for the maternity incidents outlined in Question 217335 is not held centrally as these are only available after local investigation. The NRLS collects incident reports from maternity services through upload from local reporting systems. The majority of learning and action on the causes of patient safety incidents is undertaken within trusts. NHS England reviews all reports of death and severe harm made to the NRLS and where specific remediable causes are identified NHS England issues advice through the National Patient Safety Alerting System.

Increasing numbers of reported patient safety incidents are considered to be a sign of an improving patient safety culture and increases in the number of incident reports should not be interpreted as deterioration in the safety of patients.

As organisations change considerably across time this data reflects NHS organisational structures as of 31 December 2014. This means that incidents reported before that date may have taken place in a site that was not associated with a given trust at that time.

NHS England has a wide programme of work in partnership with other organisations seeking to improve outcomes for mothers and babies, including reducing stillbirth and neonatal death and avoidable admissions to neonatal care.

11th Mar 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 15 December 2014 to Question 217335, how many patient safety incidents involving multiple pregnancies there were in each (a) hospital trust and (b) region in each of the last 10 years.

Table 1 and Table 2 illustrate the number of incidents reported to the National Reporting and Learning System (NRLS) where the incident report contained keywords indicating multiple pregnancies. It is important to note that the inclusion of these keywords may not always indicate the incident directly affected a multiple pregnancy; for example, reference in the incident report may be made to previous pregnancies. The harm reported may relate to the mother or to one or more foetuses/infants. The table is attached.

Information on the specific causes for the maternity incidents outlined in Question 217335 is not held centrally as these are only available after local investigation. The NRLS collects incident reports from maternity services through upload from local reporting systems. The majority of learning and action on the causes of patient safety incidents is undertaken within trusts. NHS England reviews all reports of death and severe harm made to the NRLS and where specific remediable causes are identified NHS England issues advice through the National Patient Safety Alerting System.

Increasing numbers of reported patient safety incidents are considered to be a sign of an improving patient safety culture and increases in the number of incident reports should not be interpreted as deterioration in the safety of patients.

As organisations change considerably across time this data reflects NHS organisational structures as of 31 December 2014. This means that incidents reported before that date may have taken place in a site that was not associated with a given trust at that time.

NHS England has a wide programme of work in partnership with other organisations seeking to improve outcomes for mothers and babies, including reducing stillbirth and neonatal death and avoidable admissions to neonatal care.

11th Mar 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 15 December 2014 to Question 217336, what the causes of these damages were; and if he will make a statement.

This information is attached.

11th Mar 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what steps he is taking to improve the UK's patient safety OECD ranking for patient safety incidents involving multiple pregnancies; and if he will make a statement.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development rankings on patient safety are informed by the Health Care Quality Indicators which currently do not compare or rank nations specifically by patient safety incidents involving multiple pregnancies. There are five indicators which are used to rank countries for patient safety:

  1. retained surgical device or fragment
  2. post-operative wound dehiscence
  3. post-operative pulmonary embolism or deep vein thrombosis
  4. post-operative sepsis
  5. obstetric trauma

Women should receive excellent maternity care that focuses on the best outcomes for women and their babies and on women’s experience of care.

There must be a relentless focus on safe care, right first time. This means creating a culture within the National Health Service that is open. A culture that reports errors, analyses what went wrong, and puts those lessons into practice as quickly as possible.

A safety culture is open and fair, shares information openly and freely, delivers fair treatment for staff when an incident happens, and encourages people to speak up about mistakes.

The Department commissioned the National Institute of Care and Excellence (NICE) to produce clinical guidelines and quality standards for the management of twin and triplet pregnancies in the antenatal period. NICE have also produced a pathway to support professionals to care for women with multiple pregnancies who suffer from complications.

NHS England has developed a Maternity Safety Thermometer – which is available to all trusts and allows maternity teams to take a temperature check on harm and records the proportion of mothers who have experienced harm free care, but also records the number of harm(s) associated with maternity care. It supports improvements in patient care and patient experience, prompts immediate actions by healthcare staff and integrates measurement for improvement into daily routines.

The Maternity Safety Thermometer was tested in a pilot phase from June 2013 until October 2014 and is now fully released and available to any organisation wanting to use it.

NHS England is undertaking a major review of the commissioning of NHS maternity services, in line with commitments made in the NHS Five Year Forward View. The review will assess current maternity care provision and consider how services should be developed to meet the changing needs of women and babies.

Recent advances in maternity care, changes in the demographics of women having babies, and preferences of where they want to give birth will form a key focus. Firstly, the review will evaluate the United Kingdom and international evidence and make recommendations on safe and efficient models of maternity services. Secondly it will ensure that the NHS supports and enables women to make safe and appropriate choices of maternity care for them and their babies. Thirdly it will support NHS staff including midwives to provide responsive care.

The terms of reference for the review were published on the 3 March. They can be found online at:

http://www.england.nhs.uk/wpcontent/uploads/2015/03/maternity-rev-tor.pdf

This review, which is expected to report in by the end of the year, will be led by an external chair, supported by a diverse panel.

11th Mar 2015
To ask the Secretary of State for Health, pursuant to the Answer of 15 December 2014 to Question 217334, how many multiple pregnancies received (a) the higher tariff for the antenatal phase, (b) the delivery phase tariff with complications and co-morbidities and (c) the delivery phase tariff without complications and co-morbidities in each year since 2004.

Information on the tariff each individual multiple pregnancy attracts is not collected centrally.

NHS England is undertaking a major review of the commissioning of NHS maternity services, in line with commitments made in the NHS Five Year Forward View. The review will assess current maternity care provision and consider how services should be developed to meet the changing needs of women and babies.

The maternity pathway payment system was first mandated for use in 2013-14, from 2014-15, national tariffs will be set by Monitor. Monitor and NHS England have jointly established a review process and will monitor how the new system is working.