| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
LSA is a daily payment for each day a service person is separated from their home base and family, for more than 10 days. It is paid at one of 14 rates that range from £6.02 to £25.42 per day. The rate payable depends upon the accumulated separated service of the service person; the more separated service that has been undertaken, the higher the rate of allowance paid. LSA is taxable and paid on a monthly basis via the service person’s salary.
LSSA is paid to eligible Army personnel on the same criteria as LSA. This allowance has three rates that are identical to levels 1 to 3 of LSA and range from £6.02 to £12.82 per day. Once again, the rate payable depends upon the accumulated separated service of the service person, and the more separated service that has been undertaken, the higher the rate of allowance. LSSA is taxable and paid on a monthly basis via the service person's salary. On 1 April 2007,
9 Jan 2007 : Column WA64
Depending on the nature of their duties, some personnel deployed to Afghanistan might also be eligible for unpleasant work allowance. This is paid at one of three rates ranging from £2.25 to £16.34 per day. This allowance is paid to compensate those personnel who must undertake particularly unpleasant duties, possibly in arduous conditions. It is taxable and paid on a monthly basis via the service person's salary.
In addition, while serving on operations in Afghanistan, all personnel are exempt from the payment of charges for food or accommodation occupied in the operational theatre.
Armed Forces: Joint Strike Fighter
Lord Astor of Hever asked Her Majesty's Government:
In what respects the memorandum of understanding with the Government of the United States relating to further stages of the development and production of the Joint Strike Fighter as a Tier I partner in the project differs from similar memoranda signed by the Government of the United States with other, lower tier, participants. [HL854]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Drayson): The production sustainment and follow-on development MoU (PSFD MoU) is a multilateral document setting out the through-life arrangements for the purchase, support and upgrade of the Joint Strike Fighter and is common to all participants. The UK's specific requirements are listed in the bilateral supplement which is a classified annex to the PSFD MoU.
Armed Forces: Steven Roberts Inquiry
Lord Astor of Hever asked Her Majesty's Government:
Further to the recommendations in the published findings of the board of inquiry into the death of Sergeant Steven Roberts in March 2003, how many sets of enhanced combat body armour are currently held in operational reserve. [HL1012]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Ministry of Defence (Lord Drayson): As a result of lessons learnt on Operation TELIC, it is now MoD policy that all personnel are issued with enhanced combat body armour prior to deploying to an operational theatre. In addition, there are approximately 2,000 sets held in operational reserve in Iraq and Afghanistan. Although stock levels change according to replenishment and issues, the operational reserve generally equates to an additional 10 to15 per cent of stock above that required for personal issue.
9 Jan 2007 : Column WA65
Lord Astor of Hever asked Her Majesty's Government:
Why more than three years elapsed between the death of Sergeant Steven Roberts in March 2003 and the publication of the findings of the board of inquiry. [HL1015]
Lord Drayson: The Army could not conduct a board of inquiry before the conclusion of the Metropolitan Police's investigation into the death of an Iraqi, Mr Zaher, who died in the same incident, and the possibility of a prosecution had been discounted. Following the Attorney-General's announcement on 27 April 2006 that there was insufficient evidence to institute criminal proceedings, the Army’s board of inquiry was convened on 17 May. The board of inquiry’s findings were ratified by the Army's chain of command on 26 July 2006, and published on 31 July 2006.
British Coal Compensation
Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract asked Her Majesty's Government:
How many claimants registered claims in the British Coal respiratory disease litigation and British Coal white finger litigation; and, of these claimants, how many have made payments by way of success fees, administration charges or union fees to third parties, including solicitors, claims companies or trades unions. [HL1052]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department of Trade and Industry (Lord Truscott): There are 591,000 claims registered for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and 170,000 claims registered for vibration white finger. We do not have the information regarding payments made as success fees, administration charges or union fees as the department is not party to any agreement between claimants and their representatives.
Lord Lofthouse of Pontefract asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will assist miners and widows in the British Coal respiratory disease litigation and British Coal white finger litigation to seek redress against those solicitors who charged them success fees, administration charges or union fees; and, if so, whether they will instruct their claims handlers to deliver to past and present claimants advice on their rights. [HL1056]
Lord Truscott: We do not have the information regarding payments made as success fees, administration charges or union fees as the department is not party to any agreement between claimants and their representatives.
9 Jan 2007 : Column WA66
Civil Partnerships
Baroness Greengross asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they will reconsider the rights of long-term sibling cohabitees to be treated equally to couples who are married or in civil partnerships. [HL1003]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Communities and Local Government (Baroness Andrews): There were very detailed debates in Parliament during the passage of the Civil Partnership Act about the position of siblings. It was decided that that legislation was not the right vehicle to provide siblings with different legal rights from those that they already possess.
Both marriage and civil partnership are designed for people in committed and serious relationships, although there is no requirement that this relationship is or will be sexual. Siblings already have a legally recognised relationship to each other and rights to reflect that close family relationship.
Civil Service: Northern Ireland Public Appointments
Lord Laird asked Her Majesty's Government:
Regarding the decision of Mr Justice Girvan of 9 November, in the High Court in Belfast in the Brenda Downes's judicial review, whether they intend to appeal the decision; and, if not, whether they intend to take any action in respect of the head of the Northern Ireland Civil Service and the Permanent Secretary of the Northern Ireland Office following criticisms by the judge about a public appointment in Northern Ireland. [HL146]
Lord Rooker: The proceedings in this case have not yet concluded. The Government will make a decision on whether to appeal once an order has been made. Separately the Attorney-General announced on 4 December 2006 that he had asked Mr Peter Scott QC to review the issues referred to him by Mr Justice Girvan.
Corruption
Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:
What measures have been introduced or are envisaged to comply with the obligations undertaken by the United Kingdom upon ratification of the United Nations Convention against Corruption to grant specialised authorities fighting corruption the necessary independence to be able to carry out their functions effectively and without undue influence. [HL985]
9 Jan 2007 : Column WA67
Baroness Royall of Blaisdon: UK law became fully compliant with the United Nations Convention against Corruption when the Criminal Justice (International Co-operation) Act 1990 (Enforcement of Overseas Forfeiture Orders) Order 2005 came into force on 31 December 2005, and the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (External Requests and Orders) Order 2005 came into effect on 1 January 2006.
Courts: Charges
Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they have evaluated the impact of imposing charges on suitors in civil courts upon the effective enjoyment of the right of access to justice; and, if so, what are the results of the evaluation. [HL1048]
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs (Baroness Ashton of Upholland): During 2006 a fundamental review of the system of exemptions and remissions was undertaken by Her Majesty's Courts Service to evaluate whether the current system adequately protects access to justice. The review was overseen by a steering group of stakeholders, including representatives of the civil and family justice councils, members of the judiciary and advice sector, and chaired by myself.
A revised system of fee concessions has been developed and the proposals for a single system of fee concessions, which covers the High Court, county courts and magistrates’ courts, will be published in a forthcoming consultation paper. The proposals build on a system already in place and ensure we can be confident that the system is well targeted and affordable, while making more people aware of their entitlements.
In protecting access to justice, through the department's current system of fees concessions, in the past financial year (2005-06) the taxpayer in effect paid subsidies in 322,465 instances with a value of just over £29 million for exemptions and remissions. And that does not count the fees subsidised by the taxpayer through legal aid.
Lord Lester of Herne Hill asked Her Majesty's Government:
How the surplus of £34 million recovered from charges levied on users of the civil courts by HM Courts Service in the year ending 31 March 2006 will be used. [HL1049]
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: The Treasury has agreed that the over-recovery of £34 million can be phased out over the Comprehensive Spending Review 2007 period. Therefore, Her Majesty's Courts Service proposes to use the increased income generated to fund: progressive reductions in the civil over-recovery; the additional cost of the proposed reforms in the remission and exemption policy; and any planned
9 Jan 2007 : Column WA68
We are also proposing to make the appropriate reductions to offset extra income from hearing fees and to eliminate the over-recovery. This would be targeted on issue fees and weighted towards the fees for using e-channels (County Court Bulk Centre, Money Claim OnLine and Possession Claim OnLine), reflecting the lower cost compared with paper issue and the objective of promoting their greater use as part of the Her Majesty's Courts Service's business strategy.
Courts: Magistrates'
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State, Department for Constitutional Affairs (Baroness Ashton of Upholland): The table below details the magistrates’ court closures and amalgamations that the department has been notified of since May 1997.
Up until 1 April 2005 magistrates’ courts were the responsibility of locally managed magistrates’ courts committees who were statutorily independent. They were not required by statute to inform the department of any magistrates’ courts closures that were not subject to an appeal under Section 56(3) of the Justices of the Peace Act 1997 (now repealed). Since May 1997 a number of new courthouses have been built.
| Magistrates’ Courts | ||
| Year | Courthouse closed | Date of closure |
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether delays in bringing those charged with offences before magistrates’ courts have increased as a result of closing smaller courts; and, if so, to what extent. [HL978]
Baroness Ashton of Upholland: It is not possible to attribute any changes in delay specifically to the closure of smaller courts. However, the estimated average time from offence to first listing for charged indictable/triable-either-way cases in 2005 was 60 days, a 9 per cent decrease in delay from 66 days in 1997.
Lord Hylton asked Her Majesty's Government:
By how much failure by persons charged to attend courts has increased since 1997 (a) in absolute terms, and (b) in relation to total cases heard in magistrates’ courts. [HL979]
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |