Asked by: Grahame Morris (Labour - Easington)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, which private companies hold contracts for the procurement of hotel accommodation for asylum applicants.
Answered by Robert Jenrick
Due to the continuing unprecedented high volume of small boats arrivals and the historical pressure from COVID-19 measures on the asylum system it has been necessary to continue to use hotels to accommodate some asylum seekers to meet our immediate statutory need.
The precise number of hotel spaces available will fluctuate through each day, therefore it is not possible to advise how many accommodation spaces were available to asylum seekers on each day since 5 September 2022.
Under the Asylum Accommodation and Support Services Contracts (AASC), three accommodation providers have been contracted to procure and provide hotel accommodation for asylum seekers; Clearsprings Ready Homes, Mears Group and Serco.
The contracts have been awarded on a regional basis as follows.
Accommodation costs are considered to be commercially confidential, therefore the Home Office does not publish this information. However, total expenditure on asylum is published in the Home Office Annual Report and Accounts, available at https://www.gov.uk/government/collections/ho-annual-reports-and-accounts
Asked by: Sarah Olney (Liberal Democrat - Richmond Park)
Question to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy:
To ask the Secretary of State for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy, what estimate he has made of the number of business insolvencies there have been in the food and beverage services industry in each region in each of the last five years.
Answered by Dean Russell
The data used for insolvency statistics is compiled from information at Companies House. The registered office address for a company may not be representative of its trading location, and often it is changed upon insolvency to the address of the appointed Insolvency Practitioner dealing with the case. Subject to these caveats, the table below sets out the data on estimated company insolvencies by year and region for companies in the food and beverage service activities division (SIC code 56) between 2017 and 2022. The 2022 figures are up to the 30th June 2022.
Table 1: Estimated company insolvencies in the food and beverage services division by region and year, 1st January 2017 to 30th June 2022, United Kingdom
Source: Insolvency Service
Region/ Country[1] | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022[2] | |
North East | 65 | 75 | 65 | 46 | 42 | 46 | |
North West | 216 | 304 | 364 | 270 | 223 | 212 | |
Yorkshire and The Humber | 236 | 241 | 276 | 209 | 271 | 153 | |
East Midlands | 135 | 157 | 180 | 82 | 85 | 72 | |
West Midlands | 136 | 192 | 196 | 166 | 160 | 102 | |
East of England | 98 | 126 | 122 | 103 | 141 | 128 | |
London | 391 | 509 | 574 | 410 | 369 | 250 | |
South East | 137 | 155 | 168 | 140 | 124 | 86 | |
South West | 89 | 120 | 134 | 80 | 86 | 46 | |
Northern Ireland | 32 | 39 | 59 | 23 | 8 | 13 | |
Scotland | 105 | 172 | 192 | 108 | 77 | 56 | |
Wales | 46 | 57 | 68 | 41 | 36 | 31 | |
Unknown | 9 | 7 | 4 | 7 | 2 | 2 | |
[1] Region/country is based on registered company address, which may not be representative of a company’s trading location. [2] 2022 number up to 30th June 2022 |
|
|
|
| |||
Asked by: Ian Mearns (Labour - Gateshead)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, what recent notifications she has received that (a) Chiltern Railways, (b) Cross Country Trains, (c) Greater Anglia, (d) LNER, (e) East Midlands Railway, (f) c2c, (g) Great Western Railway, (h) GTR, (i) Northern Trains, (j) South Eastern, (k) South Western Railway, (l) TransPennine Express, (m) Avanti West Coast and (n) West Midlands Trains plan to submit applications to close ticket offices regulated by Schedule 17 of the Ticketing and Settlement Agreement.
Answered by Kevin Foster
We want to move staff from behind the ticket office screens to more visible and accessible roles around stations which better support customers and train operating companies have set out early proposals for station retail reform. Any decisions which are taken will be made in accordance with the TSA and the relevant guidance.
Asked by: Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi (Labour - Slough)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will take steps with the relevant stakeholders to (a) investigate the circumstances in which a disabled person was required to ascend station stairs without assistance on Friday 17 June at Milton Keynes station and (b) ensure that a similar incident does not reoccur.
Answered by Wendy Morton
My officials are aware of this incident and have been in contact with the relevant train operating companies. A joint investigation by Avanti West Coast, West Midlands Trains and Network Rail has recently concluded and relevant recommendations are being considered as required. Whilst I await confirmation of all recommendations being fulfilled, I understand that Avanti West Coast is continuing to engage directly with Mr Nicholson and has invited him to join their Accessibility Panel to discuss improvements.
Asked by: Tim Farron (Liberal Democrat - Westmorland and Lonsdale)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, whether his Department has carried out an impact assessment on the potential impact of sewage discharged in areas at risk of drought.
Answered by Steve Double
There are currently nine Environment Agency (EA) operational areas (Yorkshire, West Midlands, East Anglia, Lincolnshire and Northamptonshire, Thames, Wessex, East Midlands, Solent and South Downs, and Devon and Cornwall) that are experiencing prolonged dry weather, which is the early stage of drought. The EA has provided advice to water companies to reduce the potential impact of this on wastewater treatment as well as any potential use of sewage overflows, should there be any imminent heavy rainfall.
Asked by: Steve Reed (Labour (Co-op) - Croydon North)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many and what proportion of community payback projects nominated by members of the public have been completed in each of the last five years.
Answered by Kit Malthouse
Community Payback sees offenders make reparation for their crimes in a constructive and demanding way. Community Payback should be a visible punishment, with offenders undertaking work that benefits the communities they have harmed.
Local engagement is an integral part of Community Payback, and we encourage members of the public to nominate projects via the Gov.uk website. The public can provide a unique insight into the needs of their local area and therefore the merit of public nominations is that projects are responsive to those priorities. The nominations we receive are then assessed by local Community Payback teams for suitability to ensure that the proposal benefits the local community, does not directly replace paid employment, and does not contravene state aid or competitive advantage regulations.
Suitable projects may include removing graffiti from a public building, clearing wasteland, or decorating a community centre.
Prior to unification of the Probation Service in June 2021, Community Payback was delivered by Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) who had their own processes for capturing public nominations. CRC contracts did not require them to report on these processes. However, under CRCs the public could also nominate projects via the Gov.uk website and we do retain this data, dating back to September 2019. There is no data prior to 2019.
Table 1 presents nominations received via the Gov.uk website for each CRC between September 2019 and June 2021.
Table 1 | 03/09/2019-> 30/06/21 |
Northumbria | 4 |
Cumbria and Lancashire | 25 |
Durham Tees valley | 5 |
Humber Lincoln and North Yorkshire | 11 |
West Yorkshire | 9 |
Cheshire Greater Manchester | 22 |
Merseyside | 4 |
South Yorkshire | 8 |
Staffordshire and West Midlands & Derby, Leicester, Nottingham and Rutland | 34 |
| |
Wales | 10 |
Warwickshire West Mercia | 7 |
Bristol, Gloucester, Somerset and Wiltshire | 13 |
Devon Dorset and Cornwall | 12 |
Hampshire and Isle of Wight | 7 |
Thames Valley | 12 |
London | 31 |
Bedfordshire, Northampton, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire | 10 |
Essex | 10 |
Norfolk and Suffolk | 12 |
Kent Surrey and Sussex | 53 |
Following unification in June 2021, the Probation Service assumed responsibility for all public nominations. Table 2 presents nominations received by each Probation region via Gov.uk from unification until 21 June 2022.
|
| ||
Table 2 | 01/07/21 - 21/06/22 | ||
East Midlands | 23 | ||
East of England | 42 | ||
Greater Manchester | 17 | ||
Kent, Surrey and Sussex | 29 | ||
London | 24 | ||
North East | 12 | ||
North West | 61 | ||
South Central | 26 | ||
South West | 35 | ||
Wales | 28 | ||
West Midlands | 39 | ||
Yorkshire & Humberside | 72 | ||
|
| ||
We are unable to provide data on how many projects nominated by members of the public have been completed in each of the last five years as CRCs were not required to collect this data. However, we are working to improve our data collection post-unification as part of wider reforms to Community Payback.
Asked by: Steve Reed (Labour (Co-op) - Croydon North)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the potential merits of the types of Community Payback projects nominated by members of the public in each of the last five years.
Answered by Kit Malthouse
Community Payback sees offenders make reparation for their crimes in a constructive and demanding way. Community Payback should be a visible punishment, with offenders undertaking work that benefits the communities they have harmed.
Local engagement is an integral part of Community Payback, and we encourage members of the public to nominate projects via the Gov.uk website. The public can provide a unique insight into the needs of their local area and therefore the merit of public nominations is that projects are responsive to those priorities. The nominations we receive are then assessed by local Community Payback teams for suitability to ensure that the proposal benefits the local community, does not directly replace paid employment, and does not contravene state aid or competitive advantage regulations.
Suitable projects may include removing graffiti from a public building, clearing wasteland, or decorating a community centre.
Prior to unification of the Probation Service in June 2021, Community Payback was delivered by Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) who had their own processes for capturing public nominations. CRC contracts did not require them to report on these processes. However, under CRCs the public could also nominate projects via the Gov.uk website and we do retain this data, dating back to September 2019. There is no data prior to 2019.
Table 1 presents nominations received via the Gov.uk website for each CRC between September 2019 and June 2021.
Table 1 | 03/09/2019-> 30/06/21 |
Northumbria | 4 |
Cumbria and Lancashire | 25 |
Durham Tees valley | 5 |
Humber Lincoln and North Yorkshire | 11 |
West Yorkshire | 9 |
Cheshire Greater Manchester | 22 |
Merseyside | 4 |
South Yorkshire | 8 |
Staffordshire and West Midlands & Derby, Leicester, Nottingham and Rutland | 34 |
| |
Wales | 10 |
Warwickshire West Mercia | 7 |
Bristol, Gloucester, Somerset and Wiltshire | 13 |
Devon Dorset and Cornwall | 12 |
Hampshire and Isle of Wight | 7 |
Thames Valley | 12 |
London | 31 |
Bedfordshire, Northampton, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire | 10 |
Essex | 10 |
Norfolk and Suffolk | 12 |
Kent Surrey and Sussex | 53 |
Following unification in June 2021, the Probation Service assumed responsibility for all public nominations. Table 2 presents nominations received by each Probation region via Gov.uk from unification until 21 June 2022.
|
| ||
Table 2 | 01/07/21 - 21/06/22 | ||
East Midlands | 23 | ||
East of England | 42 | ||
Greater Manchester | 17 | ||
Kent, Surrey and Sussex | 29 | ||
London | 24 | ||
North East | 12 | ||
North West | 61 | ||
South Central | 26 | ||
South West | 35 | ||
Wales | 28 | ||
West Midlands | 39 | ||
Yorkshire & Humberside | 72 | ||
|
| ||
We are unable to provide data on how many projects nominated by members of the public have been completed in each of the last five years as CRCs were not required to collect this data. However, we are working to improve our data collection post-unification as part of wider reforms to Community Payback.
Asked by: Steve Reed (Labour (Co-op) - Croydon North)
Question to the Ministry of Justice:
To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, how many community payback projects have been nominated by members of the public in every region of England and Wales in each of the last five years.
Answered by Kit Malthouse
Community Payback sees offenders make reparation for their crimes in a constructive and demanding way. Community Payback should be a visible punishment, with offenders undertaking work that benefits the communities they have harmed.
Local engagement is an integral part of Community Payback, and we encourage members of the public to nominate projects via the Gov.uk website. The public can provide a unique insight into the needs of their local area and therefore the merit of public nominations is that projects are responsive to those priorities. The nominations we receive are then assessed by local Community Payback teams for suitability to ensure that the proposal benefits the local community, does not directly replace paid employment, and does not contravene state aid or competitive advantage regulations.
Suitable projects may include removing graffiti from a public building, clearing wasteland, or decorating a community centre.
Prior to unification of the Probation Service in June 2021, Community Payback was delivered by Community Rehabilitation Companies (CRCs) who had their own processes for capturing public nominations. CRC contracts did not require them to report on these processes. However, under CRCs the public could also nominate projects via the Gov.uk website and we do retain this data, dating back to September 2019. There is no data prior to 2019.
Table 1 presents nominations received via the Gov.uk website for each CRC between September 2019 and June 2021.
Table 1 | 03/09/2019-> 30/06/21 |
Northumbria | 4 |
Cumbria and Lancashire | 25 |
Durham Tees valley | 5 |
Humber Lincoln and North Yorkshire | 11 |
West Yorkshire | 9 |
Cheshire Greater Manchester | 22 |
Merseyside | 4 |
South Yorkshire | 8 |
Staffordshire and West Midlands & Derby, Leicester, Nottingham and Rutland | 34 |
| |
Wales | 10 |
Warwickshire West Mercia | 7 |
Bristol, Gloucester, Somerset and Wiltshire | 13 |
Devon Dorset and Cornwall | 12 |
Hampshire and Isle of Wight | 7 |
Thames Valley | 12 |
London | 31 |
Bedfordshire, Northampton, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire | 10 |
Essex | 10 |
Norfolk and Suffolk | 12 |
Kent Surrey and Sussex | 53 |
Following unification in June 2021, the Probation Service assumed responsibility for all public nominations. Table 2 presents nominations received by each Probation region via Gov.uk from unification until 21 June 2022.
|
| ||
Table 2 | 01/07/21 - 21/06/22 | ||
East Midlands | 23 | ||
East of England | 42 | ||
Greater Manchester | 17 | ||
Kent, Surrey and Sussex | 29 | ||
London | 24 | ||
North East | 12 | ||
North West | 61 | ||
South Central | 26 | ||
South West | 35 | ||
Wales | 28 | ||
West Midlands | 39 | ||
Yorkshire & Humberside | 72 | ||
|
| ||
We are unable to provide data on how many projects nominated by members of the public have been completed in each of the last five years as CRCs were not required to collect this data. However, we are working to improve our data collection post-unification as part of wider reforms to Community Payback.
Asked by: Colleen Fletcher (Labour - Coventry North East)
Question to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs:
To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, if he will make an estimate of the amount of water lost through leakage in (a) Coventry, (b) the West Midlands and (c) England in each of the last three years.
Answered by Rebecca Pow - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs)
The most recent leakage data water companies reported to the Environment Agency is for the financial year ending March 2021. The reported data is at water company level. Coventry is served by Severn Trent Water, which also provides water services to wider parts of the West Midlands. South Staffordshire water also supplies water to customers in parts of the West Midlands.
Reported leakage for Severn Trent Water for the last three years in millions of litres per day (Ml/d) is as follows:
Reported leakage for South Staffordshire Water for the last three years in millions of litres per day (Ml/d) is as follows:
Reported leakage for England for the last three years in millions of litres per day (ml/d) is as follows:
The Government had set clear expectations that water companies should cut their leakage by 50% by 2050, based on 2018 levels.
Asked by: Brendan Clarke-Smith (Conservative - Bassetlaw)
Question to the Department for Transport:
To ask the Secretary of State for Transport, if he will make an estimate of the average annual remuneration of train drivers on West Midlands Railway in 2020-21.
Answered by Wendy Morton
Information relating to train drivers’ salary is managed and set by the individual Train Operating Companies in line with their annual budgets.
The Office for National Statistics report that median gross annual pay for all train and tram drivers in the UK was approximately £59,000 in 2021.