id
stringlengths 40
40
| text
stringlengths 101
3.75M
| source
stringclasses 1
value | added
timestamp[s]date 2025-03-31 00:00:00
2025-03-31 00:00:00
| created
timestamp[s]date 2025-03-31 00:00:00
2025-03-31 00:00:00
| metadata
dict | attributes
dict |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
968659bbddc1aa74360c3e2a8724a9ccea91a7ab | The 2015 Index of Multiple Deprivation
The English Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2015 (IMD 2015) is the latest official Government measure of relative deprivation for small areas. It is based on seven individual domains called Income, Employment, Education Skills and Training, Health and Disability, Crime, Barriers to Housing and Services, and Living Environment. There are also two supplementary indices for the Income domain of children in families with income deprivation (IDACI) and people aged 60+ with income deprivation (IDAOPi).
| Ward | Number of LSOAs | |-----------------------------|-----------------| | | 10% Most Deprived | >10% - 20% Most Deprived | >20% - 30% Most Deprived | Total | | Brighouse | 1 | 7 | | | | Calder | 8 | | | | | Elland | 2 | 1 | 8 | | | Greetland and Stainland | 7 | | | | | Hipperholme and Lightcliffe | 1 | 7 | | | | Illingworth and Mixenden | 3 | 1 | 2 | 9 | | Luddendenfoot | 7 | | | | | Northowram and Shelf | 7 | | | | | Ovenden | 4 | 2 | 1 | 8 | | Park | 8 | 2 | 10 | | | Rastrick | 2 | 2 | 7 | | | Ryburn | 1 | | | 6 | | Skircoat | 1 | | | 7 | | Sowerby Bridge | 2 | 1 | 7 | | | Todmorden | 3 | | | 8 | | Town | 2 | 2 | 8 | | | Warley | 1 | 2 | 1 | 7 | | Calderdale | 19 | 13 | 14 | 128 |
IMD 2015 includes results for small geographic areas called Lower Layer Super Output areas (LSOAs). LSOAs contain approximately 1500 residents. There are 32,844 LSOAs in England of which 128 are in Calderdale.
The table to the left and the map overleaf summarise the number of LSOAs in Calderdale within the 10%, 20%, and 30% most deprived in England overall.
IMD scores are based on 37 indicator results mainly from the 2012/13 period or 2011 Census.
Further information Selected IMD 2015 results for Calderdale – including maps - are available to download from Calderdale Dataworks; IMD 2015 complete results for England are available from the Gov.uk website; for all other enquiries contact performance.businessintelligence@calderdale.gov.uk
Calderdale IMD 2015 Factsheet 1: Overall results
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1566-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 3763,
"total-output-tokens": 838,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3678,
1
],
[
3678,
3678,
2
]
]
} |
60c6b555f3a49d781d788612b3697f6267ebad5a | The Index of Income Deprivation measures the proportion of the population in an area that live in income deprived families. The definition of income deprivation adopted here includes both families that are out-of-work and families that are in work but who have low earnings (and who satisfy the respective means tests). The table summarises the number of neighbourhoods called LSOAs in Calderdale that are within 30% most deprived in England for this domain. There are 32,844 LSOAs in England, and 128 in Calderdale.
| Ward | Number of LSOAs | |-----------------------------|-----------------| | | 10% Most Deprived | >10% - 20% Most Deprived | >20% - 30% Most Deprived | Total | | Brighouse | 1 | 7 | | | | Calder | 8 | | | | | Elland | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | | Greetland and Stainland | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | | Hipperholme and Lightcliffe | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 | | Illingworth and Mixenden | 3 | 3 | 9 | | | Luddendenfoot | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 | | Northowram and Shelf | 4 | 1 | 2 | 8 | | Ovenden | 8 | 2 | 10 | | | Park | 8 | 2 | 10 | | | Rastrick | 1 | 1 | 7 | | | Ryburn | 1 | 1 | 6 | | | Skircoat | 1 | 1 | 7 | | | Sowerby Bridge | 3 | 3 | 7 | | | Todmorden | 2 | 1 | 8 | | | Town | 2 | 2 | 8 | | | Warley | 1 | 2 | 1 | 7 | | Calderdale | 20 | 12 | 16 | 128 |
Further information Selected IMD 2015 results for Calderdale – including maps - are available to download from Calderdale Dataworks; IMD 2015 complete results for England are available from the Gov.uk website; for all other enquiries contact performance.businessintelligence@calderdale.gov.uk The 2015 Index of Income deprivation: IDACI Source: DCLG 2015 English Index of Multiple Deprivation
Income Deprivation among children index (IDACI) measures the proportion of children aged 0-15 in families that are in receipt of Income Support, income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance, Pension Credit Guarantee or Child Tax Credit below a given threshold. The table summarises the number of neighbourhoods called LSOAs in Calderdale that are within 30% most deprived in England for this domain. There are 32,844 LSOAs in England, and 128 in Calderdale.
| Ward | Number of LSOAs | |-----------------------------|-----------------| | | 10% Most Deprived | >10% - 20% Most Deprived | >20% - 30% Most Deprived | Total | | Brighouse | 1 | 1 | | 7 | | Calder | 1 | 1 | | 8 | | Elland | 1 | 1 | | 8 | | Greetland and Stainland | | | | 7 | | Hipperholme and Lightcliffe | | | | 7 | | Illingworth and Mixenden | 3 | 3 | | 9 | | Luddendenfoot | | | | 7 | | Northowram and Shelf | | | | 7 | | Ovenden | 4 | 1 | 1 | 8 | | Park | 3 | 4 | 3 | 10 | | Rastrick | | | | 7 | | Ryburn | | | | 6 | | Skircoat | | | | 7 | | Sowerby Bridge | | | | 7 | | Todmorden | | | | 8 | | Town | 1 | 1 | 1 | 8 | | Warley | 2 | 2 | | 7 | | Calderdale | 15 | 16 | 13 | 128 |
Further information Selected IMD 2015 results for Calderdale – including maps - are available to download from Calderdale Dataworks; IMD 2015 complete results for England are available from the Gov.uk website; for all other enquiries contact performance.businessintelligence@calderdale.gov.uk
Measures
- Adults and children in Income Support families;
- Adults and children in income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance families;
- Adults and children in income-based Employment and Support Allowance families;
- Adults and children in Working Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit families not already counted, and whose equivalised income (excluding housing benefit) is below 60 per cent of the median before housing costs;
Source: DWP, HMRC, 2012/13 The 2015 Index of Income deprivation: IDAOPI Source: DCLG 2015 English Index of Multiple Deprivation
Income Deprivation among Older People index (IDAOPI) measures the proportion of older people aged 60+ that are in receipt of Income Support, income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance, Pension Credit Guarantee or Child Tax Credit below a given threshold. The table summarises the number of neighbourhoods called LSOAs in Calderdale that are within 30% most deprived in England for this domain. There are 32,844 LSOAs in England, and 128 in Calderdale.
| Ward | Number of LSOAs | |-----------------------------|-----------------| | | 10% Most Deprived | >10% - 20% Most Deprived | >20% - 30% Most Deprived | Total | | Brighouse | 1 | 7 | | | | Calder | 8 | | | | | Elland | 2 | 8 | | | | Greetland and Stainland | 7 | | | | | Hipperholme and Lightcliffe | 7 | | | | | Illingworth and Mixenden | 1 | 2 | 3 | 9 | | Luddendenfoot | 7 | | | | | Northowram and Shelf | 7 | | | | | Ovenden | 1 | 3 | 3 | 8 | | Park | 7 | 1 | 1 | 10 | | Rastrick | 7 | | | | | Ryburn | 1 | | | 6 | | Skircoat | 1 | | | 7 | | Sowerby Bridge | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 | | Todmorden | 1 | | | 8 | | Town | 1 | | 3 | 8 | | Warley | 1 | | 1 | 7 | | Calderdale | 10 | 11 | 14 | 128 |
Measures
- Adults and children in Income Support families;
- Adults and children in income-based Jobseeker’s Allowance families;
- Adults and children in income-based Employment and Support Allowance families;
- Adults and children in Pension Credit (Guarantee) families;
Source: DWP, HMRC, 2012/13
Further information Selected IMD 2015 results for Calderdale – including maps - are available to download from Calderdale Dataworks; IMD 2015 complete results for England are available from the Gov.uk website; for all other enquiries contact performance.businessintelligence@calderdale.gov.uk The Index of Income Deprivation measures the proportion of the population in an area that live in income deprived families. The definition of income deprivation adopted here includes both families that are out-of-work and families that are in work but who have low earnings (and who satisfy the respective means tests).
The tables below summarises the number and percentage of Calderdale residents that are income deprived by ward and district for the total population, children & older people.
| Ward | IMD 2015 : Income Deprivation Domain | Income Deprivation among children Index (IDACI) | Income Deprivation among Older People Index (IDAOPI) | |-----------------------------|--------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------| | | Total Population\* | % Income deprived | Number Income Deprived | Total Population of dependent children aged 0-15\* | % children in families that are income deprived | Number children in families that are income deprived | Total population of older people aged 60 or over\* | % older people that are income deprived | Number older people that are income deprived | | Brighouse | 11,493 | 13.4% | 1,540 | 1,927 | 17.5% | 337 | 3,068 | 14.1% | 433 | | Calder | 12,295 | 11.7% | 1,439 | 2,262 | 13.8% | 312 | 2,942 | 13.8% | 406 | | Elland | 13,610 | 16.2% | 2,205 | 2,628 | 22.3% | 586 | 3,073 | 17.6% | 541 | | Greetland and Stainland | 11,058 | 9.7% | 1,073 | 2,101 | 12.2% | 256 | 2,442 | 12.4% | 303 | | Hipperholme and Lightcliffe | 11,077 | 8.4% | 930 | 1,994 | 10.0% | 199 | 2,869 | 11.2% | 321 | | Illingworth and Mixenden | 13,103 | 23.5% | 3,079 | 2,767 | 34.0% | 941 | 2,882 | 19.5% | 562 | | Luddendenfoot | 11,923 | 10.7% | 1,276 | 2,125 | 13.8% | 293 | 3,004 | 11.8% | 354 | | Northowram and Shelf | 11,578 | 6.8% | 787 | 1,918 | 7.9% | 152 | 3,187 | 9.2% | 293 | | Ovenden | 11,717 | 27.9% | 3,269 | 2,528 | 38.1% | 963 | 2,163 | 25.9% | 560 | | Park | 16,504 | 35.0% | 5,776 | 4,864 | 33.6% | 1,634 | 1,936 | 46.5% | 900 | | Rastrick | 10,286 | 11.6% | 1,193 | 1,782 | 13.4% | 239 | 2,884 | 12.8% | 369 | | Ryburn | 10,219 | 11.0% | 1,124 | 2,111 | 12.7% | 268 | 2,256 | 14.4% | 325 | | Skircoat | 12,069 | 9.5% | 1,147 | 2,301 | 9.3% | 214 | 3,012 | 12.2% | 367 | | Sowerby Bridge | 10,684 | 15.2% | 1,624 | 1,759 | 22.0% | 387 | 2,529 | 15.8% | 400 | | Todmorden | 12,040 | 17.5% | 2,107 | 2,184 | 22.9% | 500 | 2,885 | 18.7% | 539 | | Town | 13,810 | 19.7% | 2,721 | 2,455 | 23.8% | 584 | 2,991 | 21.4% | 640 | | Warley | 11,827 | 19.4% | 2,294 | 2,596 | 29.3% | 761 | 2,643 | 13.8% | 365 | | Calderdale | 205,293 | 16.4% | 33,668 | 40,302 | 21.4% | 8,625 | 46,766 | 16.4% | 7,670 |
\*IMD 2015 Population sourced from ONS 2012 Mid-year population estimates
Further information Selected IMD 2015 results for Calderdale – including maps - are available to download from Calderdale Dataworks; IMD 2015 complete results for England are available from the Gov.uk website; for all other enquiries contact performance.businessintelligence@calderdale.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1567-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 5,
"total-input-tokens": 13715,
"total-output-tokens": 3920,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3132,
1
],
[
3132,
3132,
2
],
[
3132,
6736,
3
],
[
6736,
10181,
4
],
[
10181,
18990,
5
]
]
} |
2d3a26e5ca16568ff25ad0dc59df04d42723becd | The Index of Employment Deprivation measures employment deprivation conceptualised as involuntary exclusion of the working age population from the world of work. The employment deprived are defined as those who would like to work but are unable to do so through unemployment, sickness or disability.
The table below summarises the number of neighbourhoods called LSOAs in Calderdale that are within 30% most deprived in England for this domain. There are 32,844 LSOAs in England, and 128 in Calderdale.
| Ward | 10% Most Deprived | >10% - 20% Most Deprived | >20% - 30% Most Deprived | Total | |-----------------------------|-------------------|--------------------------|--------------------------|-------| | Brighouse | 1 | | | 7 | | Calder | | | | 8 | | Elland | | | | 8 | | Greetland and Stainland | | | | 7 | | Hipperholme and Lightcliffe | 1 | | | 7 | | Illingworth and Mixenden | 4 | 1 | 1 | 9 | | Luddendenfoot | | | 2 | 7 | | Northowram and Shelf | | | | 7 | | Ovenden | 4 | 2 | 1 | 8 | | Park | 6 | 4 | | 10 | | Rastrick | | | 2 | 7 | | Ryburn | 1 | 1 | | 6 | | Skircoat | | | | 7 | | Sowerby Bridge | | | 1 | 7 | | Todmorden | | | 2 | 3 | | Town | 2 | 1 | 1 | 8 | | Warley | 1 | 2 | 1 | 7 | | **Calderdale** | **20** | **19** | **13** | **128** |
**Measures**
- Claimants of Jobseeker’s Allowance, aged 18-59/64
- Claimants of Employment and Support Allowance, aged 18-59/64
- Claimants of Incapacity Benefit, aged 18-59/64
- Claimants of Severe Disablement Allowance, aged 18-59/64
- Claimants of Carer’s Allowance, aged 18-59/64
Source: DWP, 2012/13 Further information Selected IMD 2015 results for Calderdale – including maps - are available to download from Calderdale Dataworks; IMD 2015 complete results for England are available from the Gov.uk website; for all other enquiries contact performance.businessintelligence@calderdale.gov.uk The Index of Employment Deprivation measures employment deprivation conceptualised as involuntary exclusion of the working age population from the world of work. The employment deprived are defined as those who would like to work but are unable to do so through unemployment, sickness or disability.
The tables below summarises the number and percentage of Calderdale residents of working age that are employment deprived by ward and district.
| Ward | Population aged 16-59\* | % Employment deprived | Number Employment Deprived | |-----------------------------|------------------------|-----------------------|----------------------------| | Brighouse | 6,498 | 12.1% | 786 | | Calder | 7,091 | 10.5% | 745 | | Elland | 7,909 | 13.9% | 1,099 | | Greetland and Stainland | 6,515 | 8.1% | 528 | | Hipperholme and Lightcliffe | 6,214 | 8.6% | 534 | | Illingworth and Mixenden | 7,454 | 19.1% | 1,424 | | Luddendenfoot | 6,794 | 9.9% | 673 | | Northowram and Shelf | 6,473 | 7.0% | 453 | | Ovenden | 7,026 | 21.7% | 1,525 | | Park | 9,704 | 25.3% | 2,455 | | Rastrick | 5,620 | 12.2% | 686 | | Ryburn | 5,852 | 9.6% | 562 | | Skircoat | 6,756 | 9.3% | 628 | | Sowerby Bridge | 6,396 | 13.2% | 844 | | Todmorden | 6,971 | 15.6% | 1,087 | | Town | 8,364 | 18.1% | 1,514 | | Warley | 6,588 | 15.7% | 1,034 | | Calderdale | 118,225 | 14.0% | 16,552 |
\*IMD 2015 Population sourced from ONS 2012 Mid-year population estimates
Further information Selected IMD 2015 results for Calderdale – including maps - are available to download from Calderdale Dataworks; IMD 2015 complete results for England are available from the Gov.uk website; for all other enquiries contact performance.businessintelligence@calderdale.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1568-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 4,
"total-input-tokens": 7522,
"total-output-tokens": 1603,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3094,
1
],
[
3094,
3388,
2
],
[
3388,
3388,
3
],
[
3388,
6401,
4
]
]
} |
669458047dd3280dec4072573bd641064fd2cccf | The 2015 Index of Education, Skills and Training deprivation Source: DCLG 2015 English Index of Multiple Deprivation
This domain captures the extent of deprivation in education, skills and training in an area. The indicators fall into two sub-domains: one relating to children and young people and one relating to adult skills. These two sub-domains are designed to reflect the ‘flow’ and ‘stock’ of educational disadvantage within an area respectively. The table summarises the number of neighbourhoods called LSOAs in Calderdale that are within 30% most deprived in England for this domain. There are 32,844 LSOAs in England, and 128 in Calderdale.
| Ward | Number of LSOAs | |-----------------------------|-----------------| | | 10% Most Deprived | >10% - 20% Most Deprived | >20% - 30% Most Deprived | Total | | Brighouse | 1 | 7 | | 7 | | Calder | 8 | | | | | Elland | 2 | 1 | 8 | 8 | | Greetland and Stainland | 7 | | | | | Hipperholme and Lightcliffe | 7 | | | | | Illingworth and Mixenden | 2 | 2 | 9 | 9 | | Luddendenfoot | 7 | | | | | Northowram and Shelf | 7 | | | | | Ovenden | 3 | 2 | 2 | 8 | | Park | 8 | 1 | 10 | 10 | | Rastrick | 7 | | | | | Ryburn | 1 | | 6 | 6 | | Skircoat | 7 | | | | | Sowerby Bridge | 2 | | 7 | 7 | | Todmorden | 8 | | | | | Town | 1 | 2 | 8 | 8 | | Warley | 2 | 1 | 7 | 7 | | Calderdale | 16 | 10 | 11 | 128 |
Further information Selected IMD 2015 results for Calderdale – including maps - are available to download from Calderdale Dataworks; IMD 2015 complete results for England are available from the Gov.uk website; for all other enquiries contact performance.businessintelligence@calderdale.gov.uk
Calderdale IMD 2015 Factsheet 4: Education, Skills and Training Domain
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1569-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 3780,
"total-output-tokens": 738,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3313,
1
],
[
3313,
3313,
2
]
]
} |
4817a35e5a1b40afbb22ea9fe3251f0351b58467 | The Index of Health Deprivation and Disability measures premature death and the impairment of quality of life by poor health. It considers both physical and mental health. The domain measures morbidity, disability and premature mortality but not aspects of behaviour or environment that may be predictive of future health deprivation. The table below summarises the number of neighbourhoods called LSOAs in Calderdale that are within 30% most deprived in England for this domain. There are 32,844 LSOAs in England, and 128 in Calderdale.
| Ward | 10% Most Deprived | >10% - 20% Most Deprived | >20% - 30% Most Deprived | Total | |-----------------------------|-------------------|--------------------------|--------------------------|-------| | Brighouse | 1 | | | 7 | | Calder | | | | 8 | | Elland | 1 | 5 | | 8 | | Greetland and Stainland | | | | 7 | | Hipperholme and Lightcliffe | | | | 7 | | Illingworth and Mixenden | 1 | 5 | | 9 | | Luddendenfoot | | | | 7 | | Northowram and Shelf | | | | 7 | | Ovenden | 4 | 3 | | 8 | | Park | 5 | 3 | | 10 | | Rastrick | | | | 7 | | Ryburn | 1 | | | 6 | | Skircoat | | | | 7 | | Sowerby Bridge | 1 | 1 | | 7 | | Todmorden | | | | 8 | | Town | 2 | 1 | | 8 | | Warley | 1 | 1 | | 7 | | Calderdale | 16 | 15 | 21 | 128 |
**Measures**
- Years of potential life lost
- Comparative illness and disability ratio
- Acute morbidity
- Mood and anxiety disorders
Sources: DWP 2013; HSCIC HES 2011/12 – 2012/13; GP Prescription data; International Classification of Disease data 2008-2012; ONS Mortality data 2008-2012
**Further information** Selected IMD 2015 results for Calderdale – including maps - are available to download from Calderdale Dataworks; IMD 2015 complete results for England are available from the Gov.uk website; for all other enquiries contact performance.businessintelligence@calderdale.gov.uk
Calderdale IMD 2015 Factsheet 5: Health Deprivation and Disability domain
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1570-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 3755,
"total-output-tokens": 782,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3482,
1
],
[
3482,
3482,
2
]
]
} |
31c04a772e13f4dc5390faf1e63d5615914f52d6 | The 2015 Index of Barriers to Housing and Services Source: DCLG 2015 English Index of Multiple Deprivation
This domain measures the physical and financial accessibility of housing and key local services. The indicators fall into two sub-domains: ‘geographical barriers’, which relate to the physical proximity of local services, and ‘wider barriers’ which includes issues relating to access to housing such as affordability. The table below summarises the number of neighbourhoods called LSOAs in Calderdale that are within 30% most deprived in England for this domain. There are 32,844 LSOAs in England, and 128 in Calderdale.
| Ward | Number of LSOAs | |-----------------------------|-----------------| | | 10% Most Deprived | >10% - 20% Most Deprived | >20% - 30% Most Deprived | Total | | Brighouse | 7 | | | | | Calder | 1 | 2 | | 8 | | Elland | | | | 8 | | Greetland and Stainland | | | 1 | 7 | | Hipperholme and Lightcliffe | | | | 7 | | Illingworth and Mixenden | 1 | | | 9 | | Luddendenfoot | 1 | 1 | | 7 | | Northowram and Shelf | | | | 7 | | Ovenden | | | | 8 | | Park | | | | 10 | | Rastrick | | | | 7 | | Ryburn | 1 | | | 6 | | Skircoat | | | | 7 | | Sowerby Bridge | | | | 7 | | Todmorden | | | 2 | 8 | | Town | | | | 8 | | Warley | | | | 7 | | Calderdale | 1 | 3 | 6 | 128 |
Further information Selected IMD 2015 results for Calderdale – including maps - are available to download from Calderdale Dataworks; IMD 2015 complete results for England are available from the Gov.uk website; for all other enquiries contact performance.businessintelligence@calderdale.gov.uk
Calderdale IMD 2015 Factsheet 7: Housing and Access to Services domain
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1572-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 3588,
"total-output-tokens": 694,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3210,
1
],
[
3210,
3210,
2
]
]
} |
403653c5a8624fefa2982736ba035f16cfb52a4d | The Living Environment Deprivation Domain measures the quality of the local environment. The indicators fall into two sub-domains. The ‘indoors’ living environment measures the quality of housing; while the ‘outdoors’ living environment contains measures of air quality and road traffic accidents. The table below summarises the number of neighbourhoods called LSOAs in Calderdale that are within 30% most deprived in England for this domain. There are 32,844 LSOAs in England, and 128 in Calderdale.
| Ward | Number of LSOAs | |-----------------------------|-----------------| | | 10% Most Deprived | >10% - 20% Most Deprived | >20% - 30% Most Deprived | Total | | Brighouse | 3 | 1 | | 7 | | Calder | 3 | 4 | | 8 | | Elland | 2 | 1 | | 8 | | Greetland and Stainland | 2 | | | 7 | | Hipperholme and Lightcliffe | 2 | 2 | 1 | 7 | | Illingworth and Mixenden | 9 | | | | | Luddendenfoot | 2 | 3 | | 7 | | Northowram and Shelf | 1 | 2 | | 7 | | Ovenden | 1 | 2 | | 8 | | Park | 8 | 1 | | 10 | | Rastrick | 2 | | | 7 | | Ryburn | 1 | 1 | | 6 | | Skircoat | 2 | 2 | 2 | 7 | | Sowerby Bridge | 2 | 1 | 1 | 7 | | Todmorden | 3 | 2 | 1 | 8 | | Town | 3 | 3 | 1 | 8 | | Warley | 1 | 1 | 1 | 7 | | Calderdale | 33 | 26 | 11 | 128 |
Further information Selected IMD 2015 results for Calderdale – including maps - are available to download from Calderdale Dataworks; IMD 2015 complete results for England are available from the Gov.uk website; for all other enquiries contact performance.businessintelligence@calderdale.gov.uk
Calderdale IMD 2015 Factsheet 8: Living Environment domain
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1573-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 3957,
"total-output-tokens": 715,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3159,
1
],
[
3159,
3159,
2
]
]
} |
fa3b26cc278abaf19baa62c22d17122b00079d72 | | Organisation | Contract Ref | Tender Title | Description | Contract Start Date | Contract End Date | Review Date | |--------------|--------------|--------------|-------------|---------------------|-------------------|-------------| | Rochdale M | DN437845 | Framework | 240000 - H Rochdale | 111220 - School Rochdale | 111220 - School Rochdale | 111220 - School Rochdale | | Rochdale M | DN441165 | Schofield St | 271200 - H Rochdale | 322100 - School Rochdale | 322100 - School Rochdale | 322100 - School Rochdale | | Rochdale M | DN443056 | Rochdale C | 271200 - H Rochdale | 322100 - School Rochdale | 322100 - School Rochdale | 322100 - School Rochdale | | Rochdale M | DN445254 | Carers Supp | 322100 - School Rochdale | 360000 - Public Rochdale | 360000 - Public Rochdale | 360000 - Public Rochdale | | Rochdale M | DN441419 | ITT for the | 240000 - H Rochdale | 360000 - Public Rochdale | 360000 - Public Rochdale | 360000 - Public Rochdale | | Rochdale M | DN453339 | Dynamic Pl | 360000 - Public Rochdale | 360000 - Public Rochdale | 360000 - Public Rochdale | 360000 - Public Rochdale |
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4915-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 3035,
"total-output-tokens": 517,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1139,
1
],
[
1139,
1139,
2
]
]
} |
622b02e539f5cc954b96413088cd4c4f21dd8244 | HM Revenue & Customs Business Expenses: 1st January – 31st March 2010
Please note – these figures may not include some costs that have yet to be invoiced and will be updated to reflect any additional spend.
| DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |---------|-------------|------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 01/03/10 | London | Departmental Business | Air | £71.08 | £71.08 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-----------|-----------------|---------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 12/01/10 | London | Meeting | | | £37.00 | | 18/01/10 | London | Meeting | | | £34.00 | | 21/01/10 | London | Meeting | | | £44.00 | | 23/01/10 – 31/01/10 | Washington, US | Conference | £288.00 | £95.00 | £1988.00 | £2371.00 | | 01/02/10 | Cheltenham | Staff Event | £40.00 | £47.00 | | £87.00 | | 02/02/10 | London | Meeting | | | £36.00 | | 02/02/10 | London | Taxpayer Meeting | | £24.00 | | £24.00 | | 03/02/10 | Birmingham | Meeting | £47.00 | £36.00 | | £83.00 | | 10/02/10 | London | Meeting | | | £25.00 | | 10/02/10 | London | Speaking Engagement | | £36.00 | | £36.00 | | 12/02/10 | London | Meeting | | | £18.00 | | 15/02/10 | London | Meeting | | | £17.00 | | Date | Location | Event Description | Amount 1 | Amount 2 | Total | |------------|--------------|------------------------------------|----------|----------|---------| | 19/02/10 | Cardiff | Meeting | £80.00 | £28.00 | £108.00 | | 22/02/10 | London | Taxpayer Meeting | £21.00 | | £21.00 | | 23/02/10 | Washington, US| Conference & Speaking engagement | £1680.00 | £13.00 | £1703.00| | 26/02/10 | London | Meeting | £15.00 | | £15.00 | | 02/03/10 | London | Meeting | £13.00 | | £13.00 | | 02/03/10 | London | Meeting | £12.00 | | £12.00 | | 04/03/10 | London | Meeting | £15.00 | | £15.00 | | 11/03/10 | London | Meeting | £8.00 | | £8.00 | | 12/03/10 | Netherlands | Taxpayer Meeting | £161.00 | | £161.00 | | 15/03/10 | London | Meeting | £12.00 | | £12.00 | | 17/03/10 | London | Meeting | £10.00 | | £10.00 | | 19/03/10 | London | Taxpayer Meeting | £8.00 | | £8.00 | | 23/03/10 | London | Meeting | £17.00 | | £17.00 | | 29/03/10 | London | Speaking engagement | £24.00 | | £24.00 | | 29/03/10 | London | Taxpayer Meeting | £61.00 | | £61.00 | | 30/03/10 | London | Meeting | £6.00 | | £6.00 | | 31/03/10 | London | Meeting | £15.00 | | £15.00 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------------|-------------|------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 14/01/10 - 15/01/10 | Sunningdale | Departmental Business | | £189.32 | £189.32 | | 20/01/10 | London | Awards Dinner | | £73.26 | £73.26 | | 25/02/10 | Manchester | Office Visit | £283.35| | £283.35 | | 04/03/10 - 05/03/10 | Newcastle | Office Visit | £200.35| £69.50 | £269.85 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-----------|-------------|------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 14/1/10 | St Austell | Office Visit | £141.77| £21.00 | £162.77 | | 15/1/10 | Portsmouth | Departmental Business | £10.00 | | £10.00 | | 22/1/10 | Preston | Office Visit | £138.20| £35.00 | £177.70 | | 28/1/10 | Cumbernauld | Office Visit | £144.60| £87.80 | £232.40 | | 18/2/10 - 19/2/10 | Milton Keynes | Departmental Business | £27.80 | £12.50 | £45.30 | | 25/2/10 | Preston | Staff Event | £83.02 | £28.21 | £115.73 | | 3/3/10 - 4/3/10 | Preston | Office Visit | £206.70| £43.38 | £347.58 | | 5/3/10 | Bracknell | Departmental Business | £32.80 | | £32.80 | | 16/3/10 - 18/3/10 | Preston/ Blackpool | Staff Event | £82.49 | £125.95 | £423.94 | | 26/3/10 | Preston | Departmental Business | £164.50| £5.30 | £174.30 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------------|----------------------|-----------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 15/01/10 | Coventry | Departmental Business | £37.40 | | £37.40 | | 18/01/10 – 19/01/10 | Liverpool and Manchester | Office Visit | £136.20 | £11.40 | £147.60 | | 20/01/10 | London | Speaking engagement | £8.00 | | £8.00 | | 25/01/10 | London | Departmental Business | £40.50 | | £40.50 | | 01/02/10 | Peterborough | Office Visit | £87.00 | | £87.00 | | 04/02/10 – 05/02/10 | Sunningdale | Speaking Engagement | £11.60 | £19.40 | £31.00 | | 10/02/10 – 11/02/10 | Sunningdale | Departmental Business | £18.80 | £4.50 | £23.30 | | 22/02/10 | London | Meeting | £7.00 | | £7.00 | | 01/03/10 | London | Meeting | £18.00 | | £18.00 | | 04/03/10 | Reading | Office Visit | £15.00 | | £15.00 | | 04/03/10 | London | Speaking Engagement | £29.60 | | £29.60 | | 04/03/10 | London | Meeting | £10.00 | | £10.00 | | 18/03/10 | London | Meeting | £18.00 | | £18.00 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------------|-------------|--------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | | | | Air | Rail | Taxi/Car/Other | Accommodation/Meals | | | 07/01/10 | London | Departmental Business | | | | £85.00 | £85.00 | | 27/01/10 | London | Civil Service Business | | | | £21.26 | £21.26 | | 27/01/10 – 28/01/10 | Ipswich | Office Visit | £111.60 | £12.00 | £75.00 | | £198.60 | | 04/02/10 – 05/02/10 | Birmingham | Office Visit | £45.20 | £37.36 | £72.00 | | £154.56 | | 16/02/10 | London | Departmental Business | | | | £46.24 | £46.24 | | 17/02/10 – 19/02/10 | Manchester | Office Visit | £136.50 | | £122.00 | | £258.50 | | 22/02/10 | London | Civil Service Business | | | | £37.06 | £37.06 | | 26/02/10 | London | Departmental Business | | | | £7.50 | £7.50 | | 05/03/10 | Cheltenham | Office Visit | | | | £92.00 | £92.00 | | 11/03/10 – 12/03/10 | Rugby | Departmental Business | £30.80 | £135.00 | £115.90 | | £281.70 | | 15/03/10 | Manchester | Office Visit | £139.98 | £6.60 | £18.90 | | £165.48 | | Date | Location | Description | Amount 1 | Amount 2 | Amount 3 | Amount 4 | |------------|-------------------|-------------|----------|----------|----------|----------| | 24/03/10 – 26/03/10 | Bristol and Cardiff | Office Visits | £134.30 | £34.50 | £161.50 | £330.30 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |---------|-------------|------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | | | | Air | Rail | Taxi/Car/Other | Accommodation/Meals | | | 19/01/10 | London | Departmental Business | | | | £119.00 | £119.00 | | 18/03/10 | Guildford | Office Visit | | | | £5.76 | £5.76 | | 25/03/10 | Nottingham | Office Visit | £52.67 | | | £79.39 | £132.06 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |---------|-------------|-------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 31/03/10 | Cowley | Office Visit| | | £19.00 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |---------|-------------|--------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | | | | Air | Rail | Taxi/Car/Other | Accommodation/Meals | | | 12/01/10 | London | Departmental Business | | | £17.38 | | £17.38 | | 18/01/10 | Sunningdale | Lecture | | | £137.99 | | £137.99 | | 20/01/10 | Sunningdale | Lecture | £9.40 | | £60.00 | | £69.40 | | 21/01/10 | London | Departmental Business | | | £14.85 | | £14.85 | | 25/01/10 | London | Departmental Business | | | £13.39 | | £13.39 | | 02/02/10 | Scotland | Office Visit | £161.00 | | £48.14 | | £209.14 | | 22/02/10 | Sunningdale | Lecture | | | £131.34 | | £131.34 | | 23/02/10 | London | Speaking engagement | | | £48.19 | | £48.19 | | 15/03/10 | Sunningdale | Lecture | | | £158.62 | | £158.62 | | 23/03/10 | Lincoln | Office Visit | £50.00 | | £70.00 | | £120.00 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------------|-------------|-----------------------|--------------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 15/01/10 | Belfast | Office Visit | Air £51.25 | Rail £40.00 | £104.17 | | 19/01/10 | London | Departmental Business | Air £119.00 | Rail £51.19 | £170.19 | | 21/01/10 | Lincoln | Speaking Event | Air £123.73 | Rail £13.63 | £137.35 | | 25/01/10 | London | Departmental Business | Air £130.56 | Rail £90.00 | £220.56 | | 27/01/10 | London | Departmental Business | Air £120.00 | Rail £120.00 | £240.00 | | 02/02/10 – | York | Conference | Air £205.50 | Rail £50.00 | £255.50 | | 03/02/10 | | | | | | | 04/02/10 – | Sunningdale | Staff Event | Air £39.00 | Rail £169.27 | £308.83 | | 05/02/10 | | | | | | | 16/02/10 | London | Staff Event | Air £169.27 | Rail £139.13 | £308.83 | | 18/02/10 – | Newcastle | Staff Event | Air £390.03 | Rail £41.40 | £531.43 | | 19/02/10 | | | | | | | 23/02/10 – | Telford & | Staff Event | Air £182.31 | Rail £88.12 | £270.43 | | 24/02/10 | Shipley | | | | | | 25/02/10 | Worthing | Staff Event | Air £27.70 | Rail £6.45 | £34.15 | | 24/03/10 | London | Departmental Business | Air £152.10 | Rail £152.10 | £304.20 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |---------|-------------|------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | | | | Air | Rail | Taxi/Car/Other | Accommodation/Meals | | | 12/01/10 | London | Departmental Business | | | £41.41 | | £41.41 | | 10/02/10 | London | Departmental Business | | | £37.37 | | £37.37 | | 16/02/10 | London | Departmental Business | | | £26.78 | | £26.78 | | 17/02/10 | London | Departmental Business | | | £11.32 | | £11.32 | | 23/02/10 | London | Staff Event | | | £68.62 | | £68.62 | | 01/03/10 | London | Departmental Business | | | £11.32 | £71.08 | £82.40 | **JOHN SPENCE – NON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR**
- John Spence is registered blind therefore the expenses claimed are higher than that of other Non Executive Directors
| DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |---------|-------------|------------------|--------------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | | | | Air | Rail | | | | | | Taxi/Car/ | Accommodation/ Meals | | | | | | Other | | | | 05/01/10| London | HMRC Board | £14.50 | £23.50 | £38.00 | | 19/01/10| London | Departmental Business | £14.50 | £32.60 | £47.10 | | 03/02/10| London | Departmental Business | £8.60 | £35.80 | £44.40 | | 04/02/10| London | HMRC Board | £14.50 | £27.00 | £41.50 | | 19/02/10| London | Departmental Business | £14.50 | £26.50 | £41.00 | | 01/03/10| London | Departmental Business | £8.60 | £30.00 £71.08 | £109.68 | | 02/03/10| London | HMRC Board | £14.50 | £28.00 | £42.50 | | 09/03/10| London | Departmental Business | £14.50 | £29.50 | £44.00 | | 10/03/10| London | Departmental Business | £14.50 | £21.80 | £36.30 | | 11/03/10| Longbenton | Office Visit | £132.60 | £32.50 | £165.10 | | 12/03/10| Longbenton | Office Visit | £8.50 | | £8.50 | | 16/03/10| London | Departmental Business | £14.50 | £24.60 | £39.10 | | 23/03/10| London | External meeting | £14.50 | £44.60 | £59.10 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |---------|-------------|--------------------|--------------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | | | | Air | Rail | Taxi/Car/Other | Accommodation/Meals | | | 05/01/10 | London | HMRC Board | £41.00 | £4.00 | | | £45.00 | | 04/02/10 | London | HMRC Board | £41.00 | £4.00 | | | £45.00 | | 01/03/10 | London | Departmental Business | £41.00 | | | £71.08 | £112.08 | | 02/03/10 | London | HMRC Board | £41.00 | £4.00 | | | £45.00 | | 12/03/10 | Longbenton | Office Visit | £25.50 | | | £30.00 | £55.50 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |---------|-------------|------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 01/03/10 | London | Departmental Business | Air | £71.08 | £71.08 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |---------|-------------|------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 01/03/10 | London | Departmental Business | | £71.08 | £71.08 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |---------|-------------|--------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 01/03/10 | London | Departmental Business | | £71.08 | £71.08 | DAME SUE STREET – NON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
- Dame Sue Street does not make individual claims for business costs.
| DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |--------|-------------|---------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 01/03/10 | London | Departmental Business | Air | £71.08 | £71.08 |
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4916-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 19,
"total-input-tokens": 28664,
"total-output-tokens": 7124,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
561,
1
],
[
561,
2236,
2
],
[
2236,
4118,
3
],
[
4118,
4852,
4
],
[
4852,
6295,
5
],
[
6295,
8309,
6
],
[
8309,
9939,
7
],
[
9939,
10231,
8
],
[
10231,
10926,
9
],
[
10926,
11258,
10
],
[
11258,
12849,
11
],
[
12849,
15190,
12
],
[
15190,
16288,
13
],
[
16288,
18635,
14
],
[
18635,
19588,
15
],
[
19588,
19940,
16
],
[
19940,
20291,
17
],
[
20291,
20647,
18
],
[
20647,
21056,
19
]
]
} |
cdc7587098cec4cfdba5d1ac27ed50218d78c13b | ## HM REVENUE & CUSTOMS
### HOSPITALITY REGISTER
1st January 2010 – 31st March 2010
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | NIL RETURN | | |
**Lesley Strathie, Chief Executive & Permanent Secretary**
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | 12/01/10 | Chartered Institute of Taxation | Lunch | | 14/01/10 | Individual | Supper | | 18/01/10 | Bank of England | Sandwich Lunch | | 11/02/10 | HSBC | Sandwich Lunch | | 23/02/10 | Tax Council Policy Institute | Dinner | | | Washington DC | | | 24/02/10 | Ernst & Young | Lunch | | 02/03/10 | PriceWaterhouseCoopers | Breakfast | | 11/03/10 | KPMG | Dinner | | 17/03/10 | Ernst & Young | Dinner | | 31/03/10 | LexisNexis | Sandwich Lunch |
**Dave Hartnett, Permanent Secretary for Tax** | Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | 20/01/10 | e-Government National Awards dinner | Dinner & drinks |
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | 19/01/10 | OneVoice Charity | Drinks reception | | 21/1/10 | Employer Forum on Disability | Drinks reception |
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | 12/01/10 | Chartered Institute of Taxation | Lunch | | 25/01/10 | The Tax Law Society | Dinner | | 04/03/10 | Deloitte | Drinks and canapés |
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | 16/02/10 | CASS Business School | Lunch |
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | 02/02/10 | PA Consulting Group | Dinner | | 17/02/10 | Whitehall Industry Group | Breakfast | | 09/03/10 | Deloitte | Dinner | | Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | 05/01/10 | Public Administration International | Drinks | | 07/01/10 | Freshfields | Lunch | | 12/01/10 | Chartered Institute of Taxation | Lunch | | 25/01/10 | Law Society’s Tax Law Committee | Annual Dinner | | 01/02/10 | Addington Society | Lunch | | 04/02/10 | Whitehall and Industry Group | Annual Reception | | 10/02/10 | Addington Society | Dinner | | 04/03/10 | Lovells | Lunch | | 04/03/10 | Bar Standards Board | Supper |
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|--------------|------------------------------| | 27/01/10 | CapGemini | Dinner | | 10/02/10 | Computacentre| Dinner | | 22/02/20 | Aspire | Dinner | | 09/03/10 | Aspire | Taxi | | 17/03/10 | Fujitsu | Lunch | | Name | Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |-------------------------------|------------|-------------------------------------|------------------------------| | Mike Clasper, Non-Executive Chairman | 16/02/10 | The Chartered Institute of Taxation | Lunch | | John Spence, Non-Executive Director | NIL RETURN | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | | Mark Haysom, Non-Executive Director | NIL RETURN | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | | Phil Hodkinson, Non-Executive Director | NIL RETURN | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | | Colin Cobain, Non-Executive Director | NIL RETURN | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | | Philippa Hird, Non-Executive Director | NIL RETURN | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | | Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------|--------------|-----------------------------| | NIL RETURN | | |
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4917-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 5,
"total-input-tokens": 6800,
"total-output-tokens": 1395,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1573,
1
],
[
1573,
3298,
2
],
[
3298,
4669,
3
],
[
4669,
5640,
4
],
[
5640,
5808,
5
]
]
} |
f5babc92602cbd23a18f6494298d57a638a77095 | HM Revenue & Customs Business Expenses: 1st January 2011 – 31st March 2011
Please note – these figures may not include some costs that have yet to be invoiced and will be updated to reflect any additional spend.
| DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------------|-------------|--------------------------|-----------------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 18/02/11 | Preston | Office Visit | Air | £74.87 | £74.87 | | 07/03/11 – 08/03/11 | Sunningdale | HMRC Board | Air | £20.94 | £20.94 | | 21/03/11 | Portsmouth | Office Visit | Air | £33.64 | £33.64 | | 23/03/11 | Sunningdale | Civil Service Business | Air | £13.44 | £13.44 | | 25/03/11 | Oxford | Speaking engagement | Air | £22.54 | £22.54 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------------|-------------|--------------------------------|-----------------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 09/01/11 - 13/01/11 | USA | OECD Meeting | £341.62 | £23.00 | £1,005.44 | | 18/01/11 | London | Meeting | | £13.00 | £13.00 | | 19/01/11 | London | Meeting | | £9.00 | £9.00 | | 20/01/11 - 21/01/11 | Switzerland | Inter-governmental meeting | £192.76 | £35.62 | £291.03 | | 02/02/11 | London | Meeting | | £9.00 | £9.00 | | 03/02/11 | London | Speaking Engagement | | £17.00 | £17.00 | | 22/02/11 | Switzerland | Inter-governmental meeting | £181.36 | £35.56 | £216.92 | | 28/02/11 | Switzerland | Inter-governmental meeting | £136.09 | £35.62 | £232.81 | | 04/03/11 | London | Speaking Engagement | | £12.00 | £12.00 | | 07/03/11 - 08/03/11 | Sunningdale | HMRC Board | £7.30 | | £7.30 | | 10/03/11 | London | Meeting | | £19.00 | £19.00 | | Date | Location | Event Description | Amount 1 | Amount 2 | Amount 3 | Amount 4 | Amount 5 | |------------|----------|------------------------------------|----------|----------|----------|----------|----------| | 17/03/11 - 23/03/11 | USA & Panama | Inter-governmental meeting | £2,402.77 | £37.00 | £15.00 | £446.92 | £50 (personal expenses allowance) | £2,951.69 | | 23/03/11 | London | Conference | £8.00 | | | | | £8.00 | | 24/03/11 | London | Office Visit | £21.00 | | | | | £21.00 | | 25/03/11 | Edinburgh | Speaking Engagement | £140.34 | £91.50 | £9.00 | | | £240.84 | | 27/03/11 - 30/03/11 | Switzerland | Inter-governmental meeting | £312.56 | £71.23 | £42.20 | £251.48 | £30 (personal expenses allowance) | £707.47 | | 31/03/11 | London | Meeting | £9.00 | | | | | £9.00 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |------------|-------------|---------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 15/02/11 | Birmingham | Office visit | | | £82.15 | | 24/02/11 | Manchester | Office visit | | | £200.00 | | 07/03/11 – 08/03/11 | Sunningdale | HMRC Board | | | £7.30 | | 10/03/11 | Cheshunt | Meeting | | | £3.60 | | 31/03/11 | Leicester | Office visit | | | £85.10 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |------------|-------------------|--------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 05/01/11 | Birmingham | Staff Event | | | £101.52 | | 13/01/11 | Newquay | Staff Event | £135.00| £30.80 | £240.80 | | 19/01/11 | Preston | Departmental Business | £13.62 | £92.20 | £198.82 | | 21/01/11 | Newcastle | Staff Event | £46.62 | | £161.87 | | 27/01/11 | Belfast | Staff Event | £62.81 | £56.39 | £126.45 | | 17/02/11 | Preston | Staff Event | £75.29 | £18.40 | £93.69 | | 03/03/11 | Liverpool | Departmental Business | £53.14 | £33.00 | £91.64 | | 04/03/11 | Portsmouth | Staff Event | £35.74 | | £35.74 | | 07/03/11 | Sunningdale | HMRC Board | | £23.20 | £23.20 | | 15/03/11 | Preston | Departmental Business | £64.29 | £21.20 | £143.49 | | 16/03/11 | Preston | Staff Event | £81.44 | £11.20 | £119.14 | | 18/03/11 | Liverpool | Staff Event | £53.14 | £25.90 | £84.99 | | 30/03/11 | Preston | Staff Event | £26.00 | £44.00 | £149.29 | | 31/03/11 | Blackpool & Portsmouth | Staff Event | £96.78 | £23.00 | £119.78 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |------------|-------------------|---------------|--------------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 19/01/11 | Southend | Office visit | £15.70 | | £15.70 | | 27/01/11 | Southend | Office visit | £15.70 | | £15.70 | | 09/02/11 - 10/02/11 | Edinburgh & Glasgow | Office visit | £155.49 | £40.00 | £75.00 | £270.49 | | 24/02/11 | Reading | Office visit | £35.40 | | £35.40 | | 03/03/11 | Portsmouth | Office visit | £58.30 | | £58.30 | | 07/03/11 - 08/03/11 | Sunningdale | HMRC Board | £19.80 | | £19.80 | | 09/03/11 | London | Meeting | £25.00 | | £25.00 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-----------|-------------|---------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 05/01/11 | Exeter | Staff Event | | | £65.52 | | 07/01/11 | London | Meeting | | | £3.80 | | 12/01/11 | London | Staff Event | | | £3.80 | | 12/01/11 | London | Conference | | | £3.80 | | 14/01/11 | Leeds | Staff Event | | | £44.20 | | 27/01/11 | London | Meeting | | | £3.80 | | 02/02/11 | London | Staff Event | | | £3.80 | | 07/03/11 | Sunningdale | HMRC Board | | £32.25 | £32.25 | | 09/03/11 | Manchester | Staff Event | £81.48 | £99.14 | £152.00 | | | | | £25.00 | | £357.62 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------------|-------------|---------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 07/03/11 - 08/03/11 | Sunningdale | HMRC Board | | | £11.25 | | 25/03/11 | Derby | Staff Event | £54.00 | £11.70 | £65.70 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------------|-------------|-------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | | | | Air | Rail | Taxi/Car/Other | Accommodation/Meals | | | 04/01/11 | Nottingham | Meeting | | | £60.12 | | £60.12 | | 27/01/11 - 28/01/11 | Lincoln | Staff Event | £111.44 | | £46.40 | | £157.84 | | 07/03/11 - 08/03/11 | Sunningdale | HMRC Board | £9.90 | | | | £9.90 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |---------|-------------|-------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 07/03/11 | Sunningdale | HMRC Board | £20.50 | | £20.50 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------------|-------------|------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 25/01/11 - 26/01/11 | Egham | Conference | £15.80 | £120.00 | £135.80 | | 09/02/11 | Liverpool | Staff Event | £160.03 | £88.98 | £249.01 | | 10/02/11 | Telford | Departmental Business | £27.50 | £16.00 | £52.04 | | 14/02/11 | Worthing | Staff Event | £32.80 | | £32.80 | | 15/02/11 - 16/02/11 | Shipley & Telford | Staff Event | £62.24 | £100.28 | £162.52 | | 17/02/11 | Newcastle | Staff Event | £52.43 | £34.70 | £102.42 | | 03/03/11 | Southend | Staff Event | £6.40 | | £6.40 | | 09/03/11 | London | Conference | £6.00 | | £6.00 | | 10/03/11 | Southend | Meeting | £8.40 | | £8.40 | | 11/03/11 | Netherton | Staff Event | £49.91 | £6.39 | £56.30 | | 16/03/11 | London | Speaking Engagement | £3.60 | | £3.60 | | 30/03/11 | London | Speaking Engagement | £11.00 | | £11.00 | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |------------|-------------|------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 01/03/11 | London | Departmental Business | | | £45.00 | | 07/03/11 – 08/03/11 | Sunningdale | HMRC Board | £9.90 | £32.00 | £41.90 | **JOHN SPENCE – NON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR**
- John Spence is registered blind therefore the expenses claimed are higher than that of other Non Executive Directors
| DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-----------|-------------|---------------|-----------------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | 11/01/11 | London | HMRC Board | Air £15.40, Rail £35.00 | £50.40 | | | 18/01/11 | London | Meeting | Air £15.40, Rail £26.90 | £42.30 | | | 08/02/11 | London | HMRC Board | Air £15.40, Rail £29.10 | £44.50 | | | 15/02/11 | London | Meeting | Air £15.40, Rail £28.40 | £43.80 | | | 21/02/11 | London | Meeting | Air £9.65, Rail £36.20 | £45.85 | | | 28/02/11 | London | Meeting | Air £17.45, Rail £27.20 | £44.65 | | | 01/03/11 | London | Meeting | Air £9.65, Rail £29.60 | £39.25 | | | 07/03/11 | Sunningdale | HMRC Board | Air £14.40, Rail £16.00 | £30.40 | | | 08/03/11 | | | | | | | 15/03/11 | London | Meeting | Air £15.40, Rail £25.50 | £40.90 | | | 28/03/11 | London | Meeting | Air £9.65, Rail £27.00 | £36.65 | | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------|-------------|---------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | | | | Air | Rail | Taxi/Car/Other | Accommodation/Meals | | | NIL RETURN | | | | | | | | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------|-------------|---------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | | | | Air | Rail | Taxi/Car/Other | Accommodation/Meals | | | NIL RETURN | | | | | | | | | DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------|-------------|---------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | | | | Air | Rail | Taxi/Car/Other | Accommodation/Meals | | | NIL RETURN | | | | | | | | PHILIPPA HIRD – NON EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
- Philippa does not make individual claims for business costs.
| DATES | DESTINATION | PURPOSE | TRAVEL | OTHER (Including Hospitality Received/Given) | Total Cost £ | |-------|-------------|---------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------------| | | | | Air | Rail | Taxi/Car/Other | Accommodation/Meals | |
NIL RETURN
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4918-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 17,
"total-input-tokens": 24111,
"total-output-tokens": 5314,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1174,
1
],
[
1174,
3049,
2
],
[
3049,
4099,
3
],
[
4099,
4912,
4
],
[
4912,
6940,
5
],
[
6940,
8066,
6
],
[
8066,
9435,
7
],
[
9435,
9908,
8
],
[
9908,
10612,
9
],
[
10612,
10944,
10
],
[
10944,
11963,
11
],
[
11963,
12443,
12
],
[
12443,
14288,
13
],
[
14288,
14708,
14
],
[
14708,
15122,
15
],
[
15122,
15542,
16
],
[
15542,
15970,
17
]
]
} |
84c1e5d00216142914f19c02715096bd383b7adb | | Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------| | 25/03/11 | Nuffield College | Dinner and college accommodation |
**Dave Hartnett, Permanent Secretary for Tax**
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------| | 24/01/11 | The Law Society | Dinner | | 17/03/11 | KPMG USA & Fortune 500 Companies | Dinner | | 25/03/11 | Institute Chartered Accountants Scotland | Sandwich lunch |
**Stephen Banyard, Acting Director General, Personal Tax**
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------| | NIL RETURN | | |
**Steve Lamey, Director General, Benefits & Credits**
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|--------------|-----------------------------| | 21/03/11 | BTAT | Dinner invitation |
**Melanie Dawes, Director General, Business Tax**
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|--------------|-----------------------------| | NIL RETURN | | | | Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | 11/01/11 | The Chartered Institute of Taxation | Lunch | | 12/01/11 | Stonewall – Top 200 Awards | Drinks Reception |
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | NIL RETURN | | |
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | 17/01/11 | Lloyds Banking | Dinner | | 01/02/11 | Saxton Bampfylde | Dinner |
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | 06/01/11 | Public Administration International | Drinks Reception | | 24/01/11 | Law Society Annual Dinner | Dinner | | 02/02/11 | Norton Rose Tax Mediation Event | Dinner |
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | 25/01/11 | Gartner | Meal | | 09/03/11 | Capgemini | Dinner | | 23/01/11 | Gartner | Meal |
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | NIL RETURN | | | | Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | 01/3/11 | The Institute of Chartered Accountants | Dinner | | 30/3/11 | Korn Ferry/Whitehead Mann | Breakfast |
**John Spence, Non-Executive Director**
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | | | NIL RETURN |
**Mark Haysom, Non-Executive Director**
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | | | NIL RETURN |
**Phil Hodkinson, Non-Executive Director**
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | | | NIL RETURN |
**Colin Cobain, Non-Executive Director**
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | | | NIL RETURN |
**Philippa Hird, Non-Executive Director**
| Date | Organisation | Type of Hospitality Received | |------------|---------------------------------------|------------------------------| | | | NIL RETURN |
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4919-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 3,
"total-input-tokens": 4242,
"total-output-tokens": 1100,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1714,
1
],
[
1714,
3783,
2
],
[
3783,
5633,
3
]
]
} |
29366f4d7a31ea3798a140441036f43382fc2b8e | | CONTENTS | Page | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|------| | Foreword | 3 | | Executive Summary | 4 | | Foodborne Disease | 5 | | Food Hygiene Rating Scheme | 6 | | Food Hygiene Rating Scheme Recognition and Use | 7 | | Meat Food Business Operator Compliance | 8 | | Animal Welfare – Non Compliances | 9 | | Animal Welfare – CCTV Compliance | 10 | | Forward Look | 11 | | Delivering our Corporate Priorities | 12-15| | Making the FSA a Great Place to Work – Staff Attrition & Recruitment | 16 | | Making the FSA a Great Place to Work – Sickness | 17 | | Making the FSA a Great Place to Work - Health and Safety | 18 | | Finance – Spend against HM Treasury Limits | 19 | | Finance – Key Areas of Spend | 20 | | Appendix | 21-23| The FSA’s Performance in the 4th Quarter of 2018/19 saw good progress being made against the 3 strategic priorities set by the Board. On EU Exit, the FSA’s 1st strategic priority, we completed our critical projects, so that in any exit scenario, the FSA will continue to deliver a system of food safety that is just as effective after we leave the EU. The outputs of the projects are now being used and refined by the appropriate areas of the business as part of their day-to-day operations. We have assessed the affect of a delay until 31 October 2019 on our Day 1 preparations and have judged that there is no likely degradation of readiness and will keep this under review.
On FSA’s 2nd strategic priority of regulatory reform, the Regulating Our Future (ROF) programme, there has been good progress. The work on transforming food standards delivery is underway. We are putting in place a new delivery framework that describes the integrated approach to the delivery of food standards official controls. This will include the use of an intelligence model in combination with a new risk rating scheme to inform how official controls are programmed, prioritised and delivered. The “Register a food business” (RaFB) service has seen an increase in the number of Local Authorities (LAs) using the service to 11 and 461 new businesses have registered using it. Plans are in place to support a greater take up of the service and open the service to a larger number of food business operators and LAs through a range of Management Information System providers.
The increase in foodborne disease in 2018 is below the current thresholds for each of the 4 pathogens. However, because an increase in all 4 pathogens has been observed, the FSA will undertake further work in partnership with national surveillance bodies and other relevant stakeholders to ensure that we have fully examined all available data to understand any underlying issues. Some annual variation in the incidence of foodborne disease is to be expected and is not necessarily a cause for concern. Because of this expected variation, the FSA Board sets baseline levels which are the thresholds for action. Further action will be taken as appropriate, including commissioning additional research if necessary. The FSA plays a key role working with delivery partners to ensure food businesses fulfil their responsibility of ensuring food is safe and what it says it is.
The FSA has kept within all HMT limits in the year ending 31 March 2019, including the additional funding it received for EU Exit. The £5m underspend in Programme was primarily due to the FSA re-prioritising resources to ensure EU Exit readiness, which resulted in some delays to important but non-urgent Science expenditure. The FSA was able to part mitigate this through a budget exchange of Programme from 18/19 to 19/20 for the maximum amount permitted. The FSA has a balanced budget and prioritised business plan for 19/20 which will continue to drive further improvements in value for money.
One of the FSA’s key priorities is more effective protection for food hypersensitive consumers, which includes those with food allergy and intolerance, and we will develop measures and propose targets for delivery. Fully functioning food safety system ready for EU exit
Online system for registration of food businesses is live
97.9% meat FBOs rated Satisfactory or above for compliance
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OUR PERFORMANCE IN Q4 2018/19
70.2% of total food businesses achieved an FHRS rating of 5 (‘very good’)
99.999% of animals processed with no welfare concerns in 2018/19
86% of surveyed people recognise the FHRS sticker HUMAN CASES OF FOODBORNE DISEASE
This is why the FSA exists, to protect the public from foodborne disease. All of our measures contribute to delivery of these Q4 statistics, updated annually in March. The increase in foodborne disease in 2018 is below the current thresholds for each of the four pathogens. FSA will work with national surveillance bodies and other relevant stakeholders to ensure that we have fully examined all available data to understand any underlying issues. Further action will be taken as appropriate, including commissioning additional research if necessary.
8.2% increase in Campylobacter UK Lab confirmed cases 8.1% increase in E.Coli 0157 UK Lab confirmed cases 3.3% increase in Salmonella UK Lab confirmed cases 9.6% increase in Listeria monocytogenes UK Lab confirmed cases % of food businesses within the scope of FHRS achieving FHRS rating of ‘5 – very good’ (England, Wales and Northern Ireland consolidated)
% of food businesses within the scope of FHRS achieving FHRS rating of 2 or lower (England, Wales and Northern Ireland consolidated)
% of food businesses within the scope of FHRS with a rating of 5 as at March 31st 2019 by country
Northern Ireland: 77.9% Wales: 67.6% England: 70.1%
% of food businesses within the scope of FHRS with a rating of 2 or lower as at March 31st 2019 by country
Northern Ireland: 1.1% Wales: 4.2% England: 5.1%
The greatest rate of increase of 5 ratings has been following mandation of FHRS display by businesses. This was shown in Wales following mandation in November 2013 and in Northern Ireland from October 2016.
+0.6% point ratings of 5 at 70.2% since Q3
-0.1% point ratings of 2 or lower at 4.9% since Q3 UK Recognition of FHRS Stickers between Nov 2014 – October 2018 (England, Wales and Northern Ireland consolidated)
% of surveyed people recognise the FHRS sticker as at October 2018 by country
- Northern Ireland: 89%
- Wales: 85%
- England: 82%
% of people who use the Food Hygiene Rating Scheme between Nov 2014 – October 2018 (England, Wales and Northern Ireland consolidated)
- Northern Ireland: 62%
- Wales: 41%
- England: 52%
0% point increase in people recognising the FHRS sticker between October 2017 and October 2018
5% point increase in people using the FHRS scheme between October 2017 and October 2018 MEAT FOOD BUSINESS OPERATOR (FBO)
Number of Meat FBOs rated ‘good’ (England, Wales and Northern Ireland consolidated)
- 97.9% of FBOs rated satisfactory or above for compliance
- 19 FBOs rated improvement necessary or below for compliance
Number of Meat FBOs rated ‘improvement necessary’ or ‘urgent improvement necessary’ (England, Wales and Northern Ireland consolidated)
- 1.77% of FBOs rated improvement necessary or below for compliance
- 0.33% of FBOs rated urgent improvement necessary or below for compliance
Progress towards ambition for year one 25% reduction in improvement and urgent improvement necessary FBO’s
- 7 FBOs increase in businesses requiring improvement or urgent improvement necessary compared to end of Q3
- 1.96% point increase in FBOs rated ‘good’ since Q3.
Ambition: 25% reduction from June 2018 to June 2019 ANIMAL WELFARE – NON COMPLIANCES
Number of Cattle affected from April 2018 – March 2019
Number of Pigs affected from April 2018 – March 2019
Number of Poultry affected from April 2018 – March 2019
Number of Sheep & Goats affected from April 2019 – March 2019
1,045,790,000 Animals processed in compliance with welfare rules
11,000 Animals processed where non-compliances were recorded CCTV regulations came into force in England on 4 May 2018 with a 6 month transition period for Business Operators to comply by 5 November 2018.
The FSA carried out a number of bespoke surveys to assess compliance of the new legislation.
Any ad hoc non-compliance to the CCTV legislation will be enforced on a case by case basis.
100% of operating FBOs compliant by 28 February 2019 including one that was non compliant 31 January, eliminating the requirement for further surveys. Modern, Accountable Excellent Regulator
FORWARD LOOK TO 2020 (MILESTONES)
2018
- EU EXIT
- Delivery plans approved
- HMT - Funding secured
- Legislate using the powers of the European Union (Withdrawal) Bill
- Commence planning for ‘Enduring Regime’ post exit.
- REGULATING OUR FUTURE
- Field trials for registration
- Formal consultation for segmentation
- Define future roles of FSA, Local Authorities and private assurance
- SURVEILLANCE
- Prototype model for surveillance
- Build surveillance capability
- OUR WAYS OF WORKING
- New London office
- Consolidated contracts for plant-based operational staff
- EVOLVE IT
- Exit from Capita contract
- FSA-owned IT model in place
- DATA & DIGITAL
- New Food.gov.uk
- Digital Workplace
- PEOPLE STRATEGY
- 2020 Workforce plan
- Senior Leadership programme
- New performance management scheme
- Talent management
- Diversity strategy and roadmap
2019
- EU EXIT
- UK exits the EU: implement FSA exit plan with Functioning domestic food law
- Ongoing implementation supporting the outcome of negotiations
- Contingency plans for a no deal EU Exit are in place
- REGULATING OUR FUTURE
- Drive adoption of Registering a Food Business across all LAs
- Further develop and refine capability to support FBO Segmentation
- Trial Primary Authority NIS and Assurance Standards
- Design a new Food Standards delivery model
- Develop a single, coherent, Operations Transformation Delivery Plan
- SURVEILLANCE
- Prototype model for surveillance
- Build surveillance capability
- OUR WAYS OF WORKING
- New London office
- Consolidated contracts for plant-based operational staff
- EVOLVE IT
- Exit from Capita contract
- FSA-owned IT model in place
- DATA & DIGITAL
- New Food.gov.uk
- Digital Workplace
- PEOPLE STRATEGY
- 2020 Workforce plan
- Senior Leadership programme
- New performance management scheme
- Talent management
- Diversity strategy and roadmap
- KNOWLEDGE gathering and SURVEILLANCE
- New surveillance system embedded
- External surv. intelligence sharing network that promotes collaboration
- Pursue foodborne allergens as ‘flagship’ public health/safety challenge
- A coherent, cross-FSA framework sampling strategy
- Building our ENGAGEMENT capability
- Build and maintain our external and international affairs
- Grow influence & impact with our science
- Improved & expanded capabilities in issuing food notification
- Engage on a bilateral / multilateral basis on key FSA policy issues
- Regulation and its modernisation REGULATING OUR FUTURE
- Drive adoption of Registering a Food Business across all LAs
- Further develop and refine capability to support FBO Segmentation
- Trial Primary Authority NIS and Assurance Standards
- Design a new Food Standards delivery model
- Develop a single, coherent, Operations Transformation Delivery Plan
- Increasing our DATA & DIGITAL capability
- Deliver Data projects to better understand and utilise our information
- Deliver Digital services to meet the FSA business needs
2020
- EU EXIT
- Food we can trust operating outside the EU
- REGULATING OUR FUTURE
- Fully functioning NATIONAL FOOD CRIME Unit
- Improved understanding of strategic threat and defined thresholds
- Requisite platforms to support intelligence and investigative functions
- Interim executive powers and progression of primary legislation
- KNOWLEDGE gathering and SURVEILLANCE
- New surveillance system embedded
- External surv. intelligence sharing network that promotes collaboration
- Pursue foodborne allergens as ‘flagship’ public health/safety challenge
- A coherent, cross-FSA framework sampling strategy
- Building our ENGAGEMENT capability
- Build and maintain our external and international affairs
- Grow influence & impact with our science
- Improved & expanded capabilities in issuing food notification
- Engage on a bilateral / multilateral basis on key FSA policy issues
- Regulation and its modernisation REGULATING OUR FUTURE
- Drive adoption of Registering a Food Business across all LAs
- Further develop and refine capability to support FBO Segmentation
- Trial Primary Authority NIS and Assurance Standards
- Design a new Food Standards delivery model
- Develop a single, coherent, Operations Transformation Delivery Plan
- Increasing our DATA & DIGITAL capability
- Deliver Data projects to better understand and utilise our information
- Deliver Digital services to meet the FSA business needs
- Our PEOPLE are supported
- Delivering business-critical skills as part of our Strategic Capabilities Plan
- Our Fit for Change model is embedded and leadership strategies developed
- New Pay & Reward Strategy, Embed ASPIRE values and Diversity & Inclusion strategy
- An effective and resilient organisation, with highly skilled leaders enabling the FSA to be recognised as an excellent, accountable modern regulator
- A robust evidence base in our work applied and openly communicated to protect consumers’ interests
- Modern, Accountable Excellent Regulator
## DELIVERING OUR CORPORATE PRIORITIES
### EU Exit – Preparing for all Scenarios
| Imports | Apr – Jun 18 | Jul – Sep 18 | Oct – Dec 18 | Jan – Mar 19 | |---------|--------------|--------------|--------------|--------------| | Changes to business processes for import controls identified | Pre-Notification (EU High Risk products) principles agreed Cross-Government | Recruitment for additional FSA capacity started | Resource available to enable ports / FSA to deliver new processes | Start date for Pre-Notification confirmed by DEFRA. | Industry / Officials understand changes required from Day 1 & beyond. | Additional FSA imports capacity in place | Systems and process for minimum viable product (MVP) in place | Law is ready to underpin import control regime | | Incidents | Solution build for handling food alerts started | Recruitment for additional capacity started | Stakeholder strategy implemented | Start date for Pre-Notification confirmed by DEFRA. | Solution in place for handling food alerts | Additional FSA incidents capacity in place | Roles and responsibilities clear for incident handling | Law is ready to enable incident response / action | | Legal Consequences | Inoperabilities identified | Fixing SIs Drafted (extends through to Sep) | Consultations started | Parliamentary process started | Consultations complete | Parliamentary process complete | Law is ready to underpin regulatory regime from Day 1 | | Risk Assessment | Day 1 Lab capacity in place | Recruitment for additional FSA capacity started | Additional FSA RA capacity in place | Scientific committees expanded | Risk Communication methods agreed | Risk Assessment Principles in place | Law is ready to underpin RA responsibilities | | Risk Management | Cross Government agreement to RM proposals | Ministerial response to RM proposals | Shadow Regulatory Forum established | Governance for decision making developed | Process for decision making agreed | Resources in place to undertake new responsibilities | FSA Board Agreement to Governance & Process | Food Safety RM Forum Operational (in shadow form) | Law is ready to underpin RM responsibilities | | Surveillance | Specific case studies agreed | Methods & process in place | | | | | Case studies completed | Successful outputs operationalised | | Enhanced Registration | Discovery complete | Alpha complete | Private Beta Phase | Initial Delivery Agents understand requirements | | | | Enhanced Registration System in use (MVP) | | NFCU | HMT approved business case | FSA Board Approval | NFCU Recruitment Launched | Senior Management recruited | Middle Management recruited | | Staff Trained | Case Management System live (15 April) | Law ready to allow full range of activity | | Exports | New Health Mark agreed by FSA | Informal consultation with industry | Plan in place for listing premises with EC. | Consultation on health marks complete | | | Industry / Officials understand requirements | Replacement meat stamps issued | DELIVERING OUR CORPORATE PRIORITIES
Q4 2018/19 (Jan - Mar)
Policy Development
- Complete Action Plan for Engagement
- Delivered
FHRS
- Publishing instruction updates: Starting a Food Business and Applying for approval
- Delivered
Development of Data & Digital service
- Live rollout of enhanced registration & segmentation digital solution
- Delivered
Sustainable funding
- It will be some time before we can enact any change so we are pausing work in this area and will consider how we can pursue our ambition as part of our work to develop the FSA’s strategy from 2020
Change Management
- Implementation of change strategy
- Delivered
Operating Model (field operations)
- Target Operating Model agreed
- Delivered
Future proof contractual arrangements
- Invoke the extension of the contract by Variation
- Delivered
Q1 2019/20
Develop Meat Operations Strategy
- Delivered
Key
- Delivered to schedule
- Off track but no overall delay anticipated
- Off track DELIVERING OUR CORPORATE PRIORITIES
Q4 2018/19 (Jan - Mar)
- Discovery & prototyping of APIs
- Delivered
- Blockchain for red meat evaluation completion
- Delivered
- Review and Plan for 2019/20
- Delivered
- Assessment of GDPR compliance
- Delivered
- Data storytelling workshop
- Delivered
- Enrichment of risky foods imports solution
- Delivered
- Predicting aflatoxin risk for unregulated countries
- Delivered
- Transition MVP to BAU
- Delivered
Q1 2019/20
- Developing MVPs necessary to support transition from EU
- Delivered
- Business guidance delivered
- Delivered
- Predicting pesticide risk for imported food
- Delivered
- Programme closure
- Delivered
- Discovery & prototyping of APIs
- Delivered
- Blockchain for red meat evaluation completion
- Delivered
- Review and Plan for 2019/20
- Delivered
- Assessment of GDPR compliance
- Delivered
- Data storytelling workshop
- Delivered
- Enrichment of risky foods imports solution
- Delivered
- Predicting aflatoxin risk for unregulated countries
- Delivered
- Transition MVP to BAU
- Delivered
- Business guidance delivered
- Delivered DELIVERING OUR CORPORATE PRIORITIES
Q4 2018/19 (Jan - Mar)
- Skills Capability Plan
- Delivered
- Deliver Onboarding programme for new starters in NFCU
- Delivered
- Develop and Rollout a revised induction programme for new starters
- Delivered
Q1 2019/20
- New pay and reward strategy developed & business case submitted to HMT
- Rescheduled for Q2 2019/20
- WCN FSA Recruitment platform
- Rescheduled for Q2 2019/20
- Organisational re-design fully implemented
- Delivered
- Review uptake of digital tools
- Delivered
- Review of how we are using our office space and associated behavioral change
- Delivered MAKING THE FSA A GREAT PLACE TO WORK – ATTRITION AND RECRUITMENT
% Gross Attrition (Leavers) Annualised by Quarter
Target: To be below Civil Service Average calculated at 11%
Recruitment activity in Quarter 4
Recruitment activity in Quarter 4
Headcount by Quarter Jan 2018 – March 2019
39 more staff at Q4 than Q3 2018/19
48 Recruitment Campaigns were run in Q4 encompassing 78 posts
97 Posts accepted in Q4, of which 74 relate to campaigns run in Q3 and 23 relate to Q4 campaigns
71 new Starters in Q4 MAKING THE FSA A GREAT PLACE TO WORK – SICKNESS
Rolling 12 Month total Annual Working Days Lost (AWDL) as submitted to Cabinet Office (Q4 reporting period April 2018-March 2019)
% of total absence taken which were short/long term in a rolling 12 month period as submitted to Cabinet Office (Q4 reporting period April 2018-March 2019)
% of Staff taking no sick absence on a rolling 12 month as submitted to Cabinet Office (Q4 reporting period April 2018-March 2019)
0.7% increase in AWDL to 5.6 remaining below target.
9% decrease in AWDL short term sick leave between Q3 and Q4 (Reporting on a 12 month rolling period). Incident Trends - April 2018 - March 2019 (includes FSA Employees, Contractors & FBO/Visitors)
RIDDOR\* (Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations) Incident Causes April 2018 - March 2019
- Disease
- Slip/Trip/Fall
- Struck/Almost Struck
- Use of Knife
Bullying and Harassment - April 2018 - March 2019
- 8 times FBO service was withdrawn
- 78 bullying and Harassment Incidents
% days lost due to accident at work compared to total days lost by quarter - April 2018 - March 2019
11% Reduction in Accidents with injury. From 54 in 2017/18 to 48 in 2018/19
2018/19 RIDDOR incidents have reduced by 33% compared to 2017/18
5.8% of overall working days were lost due to accidents at work
## Affordability – How the FSA is Performing Against HM Treasury Limits
| Westminster (inc EU Exit) | 2018/19 Provisional Outturn £m | 2018/19 Limits £m | Fav/(Adv) Availability £m | Fav/(Adv) Variance % | RAG status | |--------------------------|---------------------------------|-------------------|---------------------------|----------------------|------------| | Net Administration Expenditure (exc dep’n) | 43.0 | 44.3 | 1.3 | 3% | Green | | Net Programme Expenditure (exc dep’n) | 37.5 | 42.4 | 4.9 | 11% | Green | | Resource Departmental Expenditure Limit (DEL) (exc dep’n) | 80.6 | 86.7 | 6.1 | 7% | Green | | Resource Annually Managed Expenditure (AME) | 3.0 | 9.6 | 6.6 | 69% | Green | | Capital (DEL) | 6.5 | 8.5 | 1.9 | 23% | Green |
| Wales | 2018/19 Provisional Outturn £m | 2018/19 Limits £m | Fav/(Adv) Availability £m | Fav/(Adv) Variance % | RAG status | |-------|---------------------------------|-------------------|---------------------------|----------------------|------------| | RDEL – of which | 3.4 | 3.5 | 0.1 | 4% | Green | | CDEL Capital – IT / Accommodation | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0 | 0% | Green |
| Northern Ireland | 2018/19 Provisional Outturn £m | 2018/19 Limits £m | Fav/(Adv) Availability £m | Fav/(Adv) Variance % | RAG status | |------------------|---------------------------------|-------------------|---------------------------|----------------------|------------| | RDEL – of which | 8.1 | 8.5 | 0.4 | 4% | Green | | CDEL Capital – IT / Accommodation | 0.0 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 51% | Green |
\*subject to NAO audit
## BREAKDOWN OF CORPORATE PRIORITIES AND KEY AREAS OF SPEND
| Area | £m December Full Year Forecast 2018/19 | £m *March Full Year Provisional Outturn 2018/19 | £m Movement Fav / (Adv) | % Movement Fav / (Adv) | |-----------------------|----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|-------------------------|------------------------| | EU Exit new funding | 13.3 | 13.2 | 0.1 | 1% | | EU Exit FSA | 3.5 | 3.5 | 0.0 | 0% | | ROF*\* | 1.7 | 1.6 | 0.1 | 6% | | Surveillance | 0.0 | 0.1 | (0.1) | (100%) | | OWOW | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 0% | | Evolve IT | 0.9 | 1.0 | (0.1) | (10%) | | Science | 7.6 | 7.2 | 0.4 | 6% | | Field ops (inc NI) | 24.0 | 24.0 | 0.0 | 0% | | **Total Priorities Spend** | **51.2** | **50.8** | **0.4** | **1%** |
As at the end of March (Qtr 4), the above spend on key areas represents approx. 49% of the total FSA spend (incl. Capex) for 2018/19. This is a similar proportion of total spend as forecast at the end of Qtr 3 December. The decrease in overall FSA spend for 2018/19, as at end of Qtr 4, is approx. 1% compared to Qtr 3 (from £106.7m to £103.1m).
\*subject to NAO audit. \*\*£2.1m of the £13.2m EU Exit funding figure relates to the ROF Programme. Slide 5 - Figures supplied are 'all cases', including UK acquired and those that are acquired abroad. The figures presented are from a dynamic database, and are liable to change. Source: Figures have been provided by Public Health England, Public Health Wales, Health Protection Scotland and Public Health Agency for Northern Ireland. All annual figures are calculated as the sum of the quarterly values. Baselines were agreed at the June 2018 Business Committee: [https://www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/media/document/Performance%20Measure%20Development%20-%20FSA%2018-06-17.pdf](https://www.food.gov.uk/sites/default/files/media/document/Performance%20Measure%20Development%20-%20FSA%2018-06-17.pdf)
Slide 6 - FBO compliance levels are not in direct control of the FSA, so the targets are ones that FSA can influence, but not control. FHRS is operated in partnership with local authorities who deliver the scheme locally, as an added value to their intervention programmes. Whilst LAs aim to address any food safety hazards and legal non-compliance during interventions, the relationship between FBO compliance levels and LA delivery/performance is complex. Various factors outside the remit of the LA may also influence levels of FBO compliance. FHRS based risk indicators already form part of the LA audit/intervention selection criteria, and FHRS data is being incorporated into the Balanced Scorecard/LA Dashboard project to inform our work with under-performing LAs. The figures are for England, Wales and Northern Ireland combined. Individual country ratings differ. More information on FHRS can be found on the Food Standards Agency website at: [http://ratings.food.gov.uk/](http://ratings.food.gov.uk/)
Slide 8 - Fluctuations in the number of FBOs operating has created a reduction in the number of meat FBOs rated ‘good’ compared to March 2018 however the percentage rated ‘good’ has increased since Q3.
Slide 9 – The total number of animals slaughtered in 2018/19 totalled 1,045,801,000 with 11,000 slaughtered with a welfare issue. The FSA recognises the consumer interest in animal welfare, and the professional ethics of its veterinary professionals to safeguard the welfare of animals, but does not hold the departmental responsibility for animal welfare matters outside abattoirs. The role for the FSA is to share data and insight, help link up systems and processes, and support APHA and others in improving controls and assurance.
Slide 10 - More information on the Mandatory use of CCTV in slaughterhouses can be found on the Food Standards Agency website at: [https://www.food.gov.uk/business-guidance/animal-welfare#mandatory-use-of-cctv-in-slaughterhouses](https://www.food.gov.uk/business-guidance/animal-welfare#mandatory-use-of-cctv-in-slaughterhouses)
Slide 15 – People Strategy - New pay and reward strategy developed & business case submitted to HMT: Although a business case has been agreed by the Executive Management Team, subject to affordability, and discussions with TUS are ongoing prior to submitting the business case to Treasury/Cabinet Office, the business case will not be considered by Cabinet Office until this year’s pay remit has been published.
WCN FSA Recruitment platform: Roll out is dependent on Cabinet Office timetable. In the meantime, engagement activities to support the lead up to commencing the supported 9 week implementation period for the new Applicant Tracker system called VX, commence in May 2019, with go live scheduled for 15 July 2019.
Slide 18 - RIDDOR requires employers to report certain serious workplace accidents, occupational diseases and specified dangerous occurrences (near misses) to the Health and Safety Executive. All Health and safety figures correct as at 17 May 2019.
Slides 19 & 20 – Provisional figures subject to NAO audit
## Appendix – Reporting in 2018/19
| Content / Number of Slides per area | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | |------------------------------------|----|----|----|----| | Public Trust and Awareness 1 slide | X | | | X | | Recognition and use of FHRS scheme 1 slide | | | | X | | People who believe and accept FSA messages 1 slide | X | | | X | | Health and Safety 1 slide | | | | X | | Diversity and Inclusion 2 slides | X | | | X | | Staff Attrition & Sickness 2 slides | X | X | | X | | Civil Service People Survey 3 slides | | | Dependent on publication date | X | | Forward Look 1 slide | X | X | | X | | Delivering our Corporate Priorities 4 slides | X | X | | X | | Spend against HMT Treasury Limits 1 slide | X | X | | X | | Key Areas of Spend 1 slide | X | X | | X | | Investment in the 2015-2020 Strategic Plan 1 slide | X | X | | X |
## Appendix – Reporting in 2018/19
| Content / Number of Slides per area | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | |------------------------------------|----|----|----|----| | Human Cases of Foodborne Disease 1 slide | | | | X | | Food Hygiene Rating Scheme 1 slide | X | X | X | X | | Meat FBO compliance 1 slide | X | X | X | X | | Animal welfare (visiting slides) 2 slides | | | | X | | People report following recommended food safety practices in their home 1 slide | Bi-annual | | | X | | Confidence that food is what it says it is 1 slide | Bi-annual | | | X | | FSA Food Safety week (visiting slides) 1 slide | | | X | (2018/19) | | FSA Key Messages and Media Coverage (visiting slides) 1 slide | | | X | (2018/19) | | Incidents 1 slide | | | | X | | Recalls 1 slide | | | | X | | NI Business engagement with Calorie Wise and consumer awareness of Calories 1 slide | | | | X | | NI Consumer Demand for healthy Options | Bi-annual | | | X |
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4920-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 23,
"total-input-tokens": 46854,
"total-output-tokens": 8667,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
0,
1
],
[
0,
1478,
2
],
[
1478,
4725,
3
],
[
4725,
5140,
4
],
[
5140,
5946,
5
],
[
5946,
6832,
6
],
[
6832,
7452,
7
],
[
7452,
8297,
8
],
[
8297,
8688,
9
],
[
8688,
9171,
10
],
[
9171,
14319,
11
],
[
14319,
17303,
12
],
[
17303,
18285,
13
],
[
18285,
19429,
14
],
[
19429,
20066,
15
],
[
20066,
20578,
16
],
[
20578,
21203,
17
],
[
21203,
21922,
18
],
[
21922,
23466,
19
],
[
23466,
25806,
20
],
[
25806,
29628,
21
],
[
29628,
30545,
22
],
[
30545,
31572,
23
]
]
} |
e70cb1521aea655b4a5eb3fe68a3e0d3210d70f8 | | Organisation | Expression Contract Ref | Tender Title | Description | Service with | Contract Start Date | Contract End Date | Review Date | |--------------|--------------------------|--------------|-------------|--------------|---------------------|-------------------|-------------| | Rochdale M | DN437845 Framework | 240000 - H Rochdale | Eco | | | | | | Rochdale M | DN458716 Expression | 102300 - R Rochdale | | | | | 31/02/2020 | | Rochdale M | DN460446 Residential | 321017 - Rochdale | | | | | | | Rochdale M | DN465625 The Butts Av | 310000 - H Rochdale | | | | | | | Rochdale M | DN465448 The Butts Av | 390000 - W Rochdale | | | | | |
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4921-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 2829,
"total-output-tokens": 326,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1035,
1
],
[
1035,
1035,
2
]
]
} |
ca4e3b705ba25d29273b0a0f8e4aafbcd912b25f | Questions for Full Council Monday 14th September, 2020
Question 6
Cllr. Ashraf to Cllr King
Will this council collate information, stories how communities and people have coped during the covid19 pandemic as lessons learned?
Response
A Covid-19 lessons learned log was created fairly early on in the pandemic. This log includes the following information:
- Description of the lesson learned
- Whether it was a success or issue
- The impact that the success or issue had
- The actual lesson learned
- Any actions required
- Opportunities for new ways of working
Contributions to the log were received from members of the Strategic Command Group (SCG), the Tactical Command Group (TCG) and the wider management team within the Council.
The lessons learned that have been captured include those that had a direct impact on the way in which the Council mobilised itself to deal with the pandemic, as well as operational issues and successes. As a number of officers from the SCG and TCG were also part of the county wide cells that were established to deal with the pandemic e.g. the Community Resilience Cell, therefore the lessons learned log is wide ranging.
We are also sharing our learning with other local authorities on an ongoing basis. A couple of days ago we provided information to colleagues in Norfolk about actions taken to deal with the Greencore situation.
Northampton is fortunate in having a strong, well established community engagement network. The past five months have impelled our community and voluntary sector, local businesses and faith groups. Many effective partnerships have emerged at neighbourhood level, which will last longer than covid-19. A fundamental part of the operation and success of the community resilience work has been a result of the community and voluntary sector, the strength of its existence and emergence in the town has been tremendous.
More than 650 volunteers signed up to support our most vulnerable residents in Northampton –these volunteers have been and continue to be matched up by the team with existing community and voluntary groups (127 that have registered with the hub). We regularly ask and they share their experiences which we have collated. These are being fed through and included through various communication channels, networks and social media. The museum is collecting material and commissioning a number of artists to capture this unique moment in history. This will build an archive of material for the collections and an exhibition is in development, which will reflect the reactions, creations and commemorations of the Northants community, alongside recording any long-term changes to society.
The exhibition will be a space for the people of Northampton to discuss their experiences, both good and bad, during Covid-19, celebrate the good things created by the crisis, to thank all the people who cared for the sick and memorialise those that have died during the pandemic.
Material is being collected that reflects four broad themes
**Stay at Home** How have people responded to lockdown. An example would be Rainbows/Children’s drawings in windows, though there are a myriad of other responses and activities to be collected and included.
**NHS and key workers** Stories of How NGH/carers carried on to save lives and how key workers such as delivery drivers, postal staff, community support workers, refuse collectors, shop staff, the food industry have adapted how they work and continued to provide vital services to keep the country going.
**Not Business as Usual** How Northamptonshire companies tuned their skills to help with COVID 19/people were furloughed/music/art that came out of the crisis. How or if life has changed after the crisis (however this will need to take into account that project has a completion date).
**Saving Lives** Local and national government posters, letters and flyers, public information films and public information films and artworks made by individuals. It is anticipated that we may include the topic In Memoriam under this theme, remembering all those that have lost their lives to Covid-19, however this will very much be dependent on the feedback we receive from the public during the project.
Cllr A King Cabinet Member for Community Safety and Engagement
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4922-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 3605,
"total-output-tokens": 947,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
2325,
1
],
[
2325,
4296,
2
]
]
} |
d3f8f25d1bab5ab9430b0a117102339f50678c64 | QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IN HIV-PREVENTION RESEARCH A rights-based and participatory approach
A toolkit for HIV-prevention research centres ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Quality Improvement Toolkit represents the committed effort of many staff members and consultants at the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative (IAVI) and partner organizations. Acknowledgment for extensive writing and review goes to Maj-Britt Dohlie, Prince Bahati, Heather Clark, Julie Becker and Rachel Kagel. Thank you to Jennifer Lehrman, Leslie Nielsen, William Kidega, Judie Mbogua, Maaza Seyoum, Tsietsi Mokhele, Richard Rwanyonga, Simon Sigirenda, Surita Roux, Jane Odada, Hilda Ogutu, Joseph Nzioka and Mecthilde Mukankuku for their valuable input. Acknowledgment goes to our partner organizations—the Desmond Tutu HIV Foundation, Kenya AIDS Vaccine Initiative, Kenya Medical Research Institute, Medical Research Council, Projet San Fancisco, Uganda Vaccine Research Institute and Zambia-Emory HIV Research Project—for their participation and feedback in developing this toolkit.
IAVI is grateful to the organizations working in international health that are committed to quality improvement and that have developed a wide variety of materials in this area. This toolkit draws on these earlier efforts, integrating and adapting specific issues related to HIV-prevention research. In particular, IAVI would like to recognize EngenderHealth, which developed Client-Oriented Provider-Efficient Services (COPE®), and Liverpool VCT, which developed Quality Assurance Resource Pack for voluntary counseling and testing service providers, both of which were drawn upon for this manual. IAVI would also like to acknowledge the United States Agency for International Development’s PRIME II Project and Maximizing Access and Quality initiative, which provided additional guidance.
All information in this document may be reproduced or copied without permission, provided that the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative is acknowledged as the source.
This Quality Improvement Toolkit can be found online at http://www.iavi.org.
IAVI’s mission is to ensure the development of safe, effective, accessible, preventive HIV vaccines for use throughout the world.
This publication is made possible by the generous support of the American people through the United States Agency for International Development. The contents are the responsibility of the International AIDS Vaccine Initiative and do not necessarily reflect the views of USAID or the United States government. INTRODUCTION
What is quality improvement?
Quality improvement is the process of continuously assessing and improving the quality of goods or services to ensure client satisfaction and loyalty. The concept of quality improvement—QI for short—was conceived in industrial and commercial sectors and has been successfully adapted by community health, reproductive health and counseling services, often with different approaches and names. But it has yet to be applied widely or documented in HIV-prevention research, including clinical trials.
Generally, HIV-prevention research centres have relied on traditional approaches to quality control for services provided to volunteers (e.g., checklists completed by counseling, medical and laboratory staff). For the most part, these approaches document what has been done and not the quality of what has been done. They often fail to empower staff to identify areas of concern and participate in bringing about needed changes. Moreover, these methods might not provide any indication of volunteers’ satisfaction or provide a basis for improving services from both volunteer and staff perspectives.
Many services offered to volunteers in epidemiology studies and clinical trials (e.g., HIV counseling and testing, family planning and medical care) are similar to those offered by health centres. Unlike in health centres, however, participation and follow-up visits in HIV-prevention research are not necessarily motivated by the need for health services. HIV-prevention research also differs in that it targets specific groups of volunteers, has a target number of volunteers to enroll and involves a set of inclusion/exclusion criteria, informed-consent processes and community outreach activities that require development or adaptation of quality indicators specific to the research setting. Ensuring the quality of study-related services is critical to retaining volunteers and guaranteeing the ethical conduct of HIV-prevention research. Collective involvement by staff in identifying areas that need improvement and fostering their ownership of the process are critical to the success of quality improvement programmes.
The concept of QI in this toolkit applies to the overall environment of the research centre and the processes a volunteer experiences, from outreach and recruitment through the conclusion of a study. It does not apply to the clinical science itself, but to all of the services and processes that surround and enable the conduct of research.
The Quality Improvement Toolkit
This toolkit has been developed to facilitate the implementation of QI in HIV-prevention research. It is devised to help all research centre staff meet the following goals in accordance with international standards and local regulations:
- Maintain the highest level of ethical research standards
- Ensure effective, customized and community-centred outreach and engagement
- Ensure the highest standard of quality in volunteer-centred clinical and counseling services
Most HIV-prevention research centres are engaged in quality-related activities, including but not limited to following national and international standards such as Good Clinical Practices (GCP) and Good Participatory Practices (GPP) and monitoring visits. This guide does not compete with or replace any activities necessary for the ethically and scientifically sound conduct of research, including the provision of medical services to volunteers. Instead, it complements these guidelines and supports the research teams in implementing key aspects through a participatory approach. This toolkit is designed to help research centre staff go beyond existing efforts to ensure that volunteers’ perspectives and needs are taken into consideration. It aims to support a QI process that involves all research centre staff in making improvements at all stages of HIV-prevention research. Those research centres that have already adopted a participatory approach to QI can use this toolkit to reflect on their efforts and build on their successes.
1 Taegtmeyer, M., Doyle, V. (2003). Quality Assurance Resource Pack for Voluntary Counseling and Testing Service Providers, Liverpool VCT and Care Kenya, p4. Adapting the Toolkit
QI is a flexible process, and should be adapted and integrated into a research centre’s daily processes to ensure its sustainability. Every research centre is different and will need to use this toolkit in ways that make sense within its context. Country setting, size of the research facility and study objectives can all affect the implementation of QI. For example, some research centres might be conducting clinical trials, while others focus on epidemiology or other kinds of clinical studies. Even those conducting clinical trials differ in important ways. Some focus on vaccine development, while others assess microbicides or other strategies of HIV prevention, such as pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP). Similarly, some research centres might routinely work with relatively vulnerable volunteers (who may be stigmatized or whose behavior might be criminalized), while others might be working with low-risk cohorts. Some research centres will have fully staffed programmes (e.g., full-time community workers, on-site family planning services, pharmacists, etc.), while others will use alternative strategies for conducting community outreach (e.g., peer leaders, peer recruiters or community-based recruiters or agents) and for ensuring services to volunteers (e.g., nurse counselors who provide counseling and medicine to volunteers, referrals for family planning services, etc). Yet, although the contexts vary in these significant ways, all research centres share common ethical ground, based on international guidelines on rights and responsibilities that constitute the framework for QI in HIV-prevention research.
Toolkit contents
Part 1: Manual The Manual introduces the concept of quality, the rights and responsibilities framework, the typical HIV-prevention research process and the four-step quality improvement process.
Part 2: Sample Tools Sample tools are provided for use at the research centre and in the community. These tools can be adapted as necessary.
Part 3: Facilitator’s Guide The Facilitator’s Guide provides a step-by-step approach to introducing QI. It also contains handouts and visuals to help the facilitator convey key concepts to research centre staff and community agents.
# TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section I: Quality improvement in the research setting ................................................................. 2\
Concept of quality improvement in the research setting .......................................................... 2\
Common challenges to implementing quality improvement in HIV-prevention research .......... 3
Section 2: Rights and responsibilities framework ........................................................................ 4\
Proposed framework for ensuring the rights and responsibilities of volunteers ...................... 4\
Rights and responsibilities of volunteers .................................................................................. 4\
Ethical responsibilities of the staff ............................................................................................ 6\
Explanation of staff ethical responsibilities .............................................................................. 6
Section 3: The HIV-prevention research process ........................................................................ 8\
Stage 1: Formative research and community outreach and recruitment .................................. 8\
Stage 2: Pre-enrollment ............................................................................................................ 8\
Stage 3: Enrollment/study participation .................................................................................... 9\
Stage 4: Post-participation follow-up ...................................................................................... 9\
Figure 3.1: Key stages of HIV-prevention research ................................................................. 10
Section 4: The quality improvement process: overview and preparations .................................. 11\
Introduction to the quality improvement process .................................................................... 11\
Figure 4.1: The QI process and tools ....................................................................................... 11\
Setting the stage for the QI process .......................................................................................... 12\
Preparing research centre managers ....................................................................................... 12\
Identifying, selecting and training an effective QI facilitator .................................................... 13\
Preparing to introduce QI to research centre staff and community agents .............................. 13\
Introductory meeting with research centre staff ...................................................................... 13\
Introductory meetings with community agents (non-staff) .................................................... 14\
Establishing a QI committee .................................................................................................... 15
Section 5: The four-step quality improvement process ............................................................... 16\
Step 1: Identifying area to be improved/problem to be solved .............................................. 16\
Introduction to quality improvement tools .............................................................................. 17\
Team self-assessment – research centre .................................................................................. 17\
Team self-assessment – community ....................................................................................... 20\
Volunteer feedback interview ................................................................................................. 21\
Group discussion .................................................................................................................... 23\
Suggestion boxes .................................................................................................................... 25\
Step 2: Analyzing areas to be improved/problems to be solved ........................................... 26\
Step 3: Developing an action plan ........................................................................................... 27\
Step 4: Implementing the action plan ...................................................................................... 31\
Final Considerations on the QI Process .................................................................................. 33
References and resources ........................................................................................................ 34 SECTION I: QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IN THE RESEARCH SETTING
Concept of quality improvement in the research setting
Definitions of quality improvement in HIV-prevention research
Quality is a function of the degree to which customer or client needs are met. It requires that the providers of products and services be aware of the unique needs and preferences of their customers or clients. In the case of HIV-prevention research, including clinical trials, the client is the volunteer, and each volunteer’s and community’s needs and preferences must be addressed in the context of larger research goals. Quality in HIV prevention is thus more completely defined as the degree to which research-related processes meet volunteers’ and communities’ expectations and adhere to international and national guidelines of quality.
Quality improvement, meanwhile, generally requires a systematic process to assess, continuously improve and monitor products or services to ensure their effectiveness and safety. In HIV-prevention research, then, QI necessitates a concerted effort to improve research processes and participant experience through better community-centred outreach and engagement and volunteer-centred services at the research centre. Research centres might want to adopt the definitions of Quality and Quality Improvement in HIV-prevention research presented in Box 1.1, this page, or they may choose to modify them to better suit their situations.
Rationale for quality improvement in HIV-prevention research
Volunteers deserve consistently respectful and ethical treatment and the highest quality of services that can be provided by research centres. At a minimum, research centres must provide the communities from which volunteers are recruited with accurate information about HIV/AIDS and prevention research, devise interventions to reduce the potential stigma associated with participation in prevention research, offer volunteer-centred counseling services to study participants, maintain national/international standards of medical practice and establish mechanisms to ensure that all categories of staff are trained to provide quality services to volunteers within the framework of internationally agreed ethics and rights.
Why quality is important:
- It ensures compliance to international standards and increases efficiency of research conduct.
- Respectful treatment and effective delivery of services by research staff can make it easier to recruit and retain volunteers and ensure that enrolled volunteers follow their appointment schedules and regimens. High-quality counseling can increase the likelihood that volunteers adopt risk-reduction strategies and other positive health practices. It also helps those who are diagnosed with HIV to adopt effective measures to prevent HIV transmission, communicate with partners and seek treatment and other services as needed. Finally, it can enhance understanding of concepts such as “unknown efficacy” or “partial efficacy” and so reduce risk-compensation behavior (i.e. increased risk behavior resulting from the false belief that a study product will prevent HIV).
- Providing assurance of confidentiality to volunteers and protecting their rights can help ensure accurate reporting of behavioral data and adverse psychosocial and medical events.
- Appropriate information helps volunteers make informed decisions about participation, correctly use effective family planning methods while participating in research that requires pregnancy prevention, and take prescriptions correctly for sexually transmitted infections or other medical problems.
Why quality is important to research centre staff:
- Co-workers and volunteers tend to notice when staff performance improves. Such recognition creates a sense of accomplishment and increases motivation and job satisfaction.
Box 1.1: Definitions
Quality in HIV-prevention research
The degree to which formative research, community education, recruitment, enrollment, study participation and post-participation follow-up and access adhere to the highest standards of quality based on international & national guidelines and meet volunteers’ expectations.
Quality Improvement in HIV-prevention research
The concerted effort to continuously and systematically monitor quality of services offered in HIV-prevention research and to promote a participatory approach (involving volunteers, community agents and research staff) to problem-solving. Active involvement in QI by all research centre staff and community outreach workers leads to effective problem-solving and sustainable solutions grounded in the realities of the workplace and the social context in which the research occurs. This contributes to a better work environment.
Continuous and systematic QI can unleash creativity and innovation that otherwise might remain untapped for lack of a forum to discuss quality-related issues. This creates a more interesting and productive workplace.
Common challenges to implementing quality improvement in HIV-prevention research
Community context and research literacy In some communities where HIV-prevention research takes place, many people do not fully understand the rights and responsibilities of volunteers or the research process itself. This knowledge gap, along with the possible difference in social status between research centre staff and volunteers, can impede the candid discussion of issues and concerns essential to the QI process. Additionally, in communities where medical and psychosocial services are limited or not available, community members and volunteers might consider mere access to such services a privilege and may be reluctant to question the quality of the services they receive.
Staff may be unfamiliar with QI or lack ownership of the process Some research centre staff (including community outreach workers and community agents such as peer leaders and peer recruiters) might not be fully conversant with international standards for the rights and responsibilities of volunteers and staff. Staff members may find interactions with some volunteers challenging, especially when they conflict with personal values or their nation’s laws (e.g., working with vulnerable and marginalized populations such as sex workers, men who have sex with men or injecting drug users). In addition, some research centre staff might fear that the outcomes of QI will be used as a basis for disciplinary action, which can discourage honest feedback and detract from staff ownership of the process.
Management ownership of QI and the role of sponsoring agencies Management support and leadership is crucial for effective and continuous implementation of QI. Sponsors of HIV-prevention research can also play an important role in QI, but the process must be owned by the research centre, and sponsors must ensure that it is not used as a means to intrude on research centre management.
External factors that affect QI Volunteers render an exceptional service by participating in research. They give their time generously and risk high social costs, such as stigmatization and discrimination that can come with participation. The psychosocial safety of volunteers, one of the pillars of QI, depends on factors that research centres can control (e.g., confidentiality, community education) and those that they cannot (e.g., stigma related to volunteer’s disclosure of participation or a breach of confidentiality by another volunteer). Research centre staff must be conversant with external factors that can affect the quality of their research and take them into account when conducting QI. SECTION 2: RIGHTS AND RESPONSIBILITIES FRAMEWORK
Proposed framework for ensuring the rights and responsibilities of volunteers
Health service organizations have developed quality-of-care frameworks and patients’ bill of rights to ensure high-quality services and the ethical conduct of research. The proposed framework in Box 2.1 draws heavily on this earlier work and should help guide HIV-prevention research centres to improve the quality of their volunteer services, support high standards for ethics in HIV-prevention research and inform both potential volunteers and staff about the rights and responsibilities of study participants. Each of the rights and responsibilities is explained in more detail on the following pages.
Box 2.1: Charter of volunteers’ rights and responsibilities in HIV-prevention research
| Volunteers have the right to: | Volunteers have the responsibility to: | |---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Privacy and confidentiality | Make an informed decision about research participation | | Give voluntary informed consent based on sufficient and appropriate information | Provide complete and accurate personal and medical information to research staff | | Refuse to join or decide to withdraw from the study at any time | Make efforts to use appropriate HIV-prevention methods | | Protection from preventable biomedical and social harms | Make efforts to prevent pregnancy (if required for participation in the study) | | Access to selected services at the research centre or through referral | Follow study instructions and attend scheduled appointments | | Respectful treatment and comfort to express their opinions | Treat research centre staff with respect | | | Keep knowledge about participation of other volunteers confidential |
Rights and responsibilities of volunteers
Volunteers in HIV-prevention research have the right to:
- **Privacy and confidentiality.** Volunteers have the right to privacy and confidentiality from recruitment throughout the study and any follow-up services. In most cases, volunteers are identified by numbers, not their names. They also have a right to expect that counseling, testing, physical examinations, clinical procedures and the dispensation of medications will be done in a private area where they cannot be seen or heard by others. Volunteer records are confidential, and are shared only as needed to conduct the study. All categories of staff (including security guards, drivers, receptionists and administrators) are responsible for keeping volunteer participation confidential and should be trained or sensitized to that effect.
- **Give voluntary informed consent based on sufficient and appropriate information.** Volunteers have the right to culturally sensitive, clear and accurate information, including why the study is being conducted, what will happen during the study and what volunteers will be asked to do. They also have the right to receive information on reasonably foreseeable risks and possible benefits of participation.
- **Refuse to join or to decide to withdraw from the study at any time.** There is no penalty for refusing to join or withdrawing from a study.
- **Protection from preventable biomedical and social harms.** Volunteers have the right to a clean and safe research centre environment that can provide effective medical services and follows appropriate procedures to prevent infection and dispose of biomedical waste. The research must be based on sound ethical principles with careful consideration of benefits and risks. All research centre staff and those conducting
______________________________________________________________________
1 Volunteer rights and responsibilities have been adapted from the following sources: HIV Vaccine Trials Network’s “Patient’s Bill of Rights”, UNAIDS/WHO’s “Ethical Considerations in HIV Biomedical Research,” New York University’s “Research Participant’s Bill of Rights,” and EngenderHealth’s “COPE Handbook: A Process for Improving Quality in Health Services.” outreach are responsible for ensuring that their actions minimize the potential for physical, psychosocial and social harm to volunteers from their participation in HIV-prevention research.
- **Access to selected services at the research centre or through referral.** Volunteers have the right to receive:
- Standard HIV-prevention services (appropriate counseling and access to all HIV risk-reduction methods) throughout the study, including new methods as they are scientifically validated or approved and become available.
- Treatment and care for participants who become HIV positive during the study(^2) (such services will be provided either at the study centre or through agreements with other facilities; volunteers who screen out of a study because of existing HIV infection also have the right to referrals for these services).
- Treatment, services and follow-up care for study-related illnesses, such as adverse events.
- Appropriate family planning methods and counseling for volunteers who are required to avoid becoming pregnant during participation.
- Special HIV testing at the research centre for any reason—including applications for health or life insurance, travel or employment—should participation in an AIDS vaccine trial result in a false-positive reading in standard HIV tests. Candidate AIDS vaccines often provoke the production of antibodies against key parts of HIV. These antibodies in turn produce an HIV-positive signal on some HIV tests. The detection of such antibodies does not necessarily mean that the individual is infected with HIV. In such cases, additional tests need to be done to discern a false-positive result from a true HIV infection. It is very important to note that in all cases, it is impossible for candidate HIV vaccines themselves to cause HIV infection.
- Referral for required medical and psychosocial services unavailable at the research centre.
- **Respectful treatment and comfort to express their opinions.** Volunteers have the right to be respected by staff regardless of their personal choices, values, beliefs, lifestyles, sexual orientation, gender and backgrounds. Staff must ensure that volunteers are as comfortable as possible, physically and psychologically, during procedures. Staff should encourage volunteers to express their opinions, and do all they can to provide a nonjudgmental and supportive environment for different views.
**Volunteers in HIV-prevention research have the responsibility to:**
- **Make an informed decision about research participation.** Volunteers have the responsibility to weigh the risks and benefits, based on written materials such as the informed consent form and information provided during counseling sessions, before making the decision to participate in prevention research. They are also responsible for asking questions about concepts they have not understood and for requesting additional information at any time during the study to ensure they understand the procedures. This is essential to the ability of the research centre to provide them with appropriate counseling and, should the need arise, effective treatment.
- **Provide complete and accurate personal and medical information to research staff.** Volunteers have the responsibility to respond as accurately as possible to questions from research staff about personal information required by the study and to inform research staff of any changes in contact or health information during the study. Participants are encouraged to report any experience of discrimination or social harm related to study participation, and should inform staff if they are unable to participate or want to withdraw.
- **Make efforts to use appropriate HIV-prevention methods.** Volunteers have the responsibility to reduce their risk of HIV infection and transmission to the best of their ability by communicating with partners about risk where possible, using or asking partners to use male or female condoms, reducing risky sexual practices, reducing numbers of partners and using safe injection practices. HIV-prevention methods and counseling on the use of these methods are provided by the research centre. Adult male circumcision is an option male volunteers might consider in addition to other existing methods and newly proven interventions. Research staff will help volunteers learn to discuss HIV status and risk-reduction strategies with their partners.
- **Make efforts to prevent pregnancy if required for participation.** Female volunteers have the responsibility to use effective birth control methods (provided by the research centre or through referral) to prevent pregnancy if required to do so by the study protocol. This is important during clinical trials, as it is typically unknown what effect, if any, an experimental product is likely to have on fetal development.
______________________________________________________________________
(^2) While volunteers are counseled extensively regarding risk-reduction behaviours and provided with condoms, some volunteers may still engage in risky behaviour and become infected with HIV. HIV vaccine candidates do not contain live virus and cannot cause infection. Follow study instructions and attend scheduled appointments. Volunteers have the responsibility to follow instructions related to the research product to the best of their ability and work with study staff to maintain health and safety during the study. Volunteers are encouraged to attend all scheduled appointments or reschedule the appointment if a conflict arises.
Treat all research centre staff and other volunteers with respect.
Keep knowledge about the participation of other volunteers in the study confidential. Volunteers have the responsibility to respect the privacy of others participating in the study. The volunteer alone has the right to decide whether to inform his or her partner(s) or others about participation in the study.
Ethical responsibilities of the staff
Research centre staff members have ethical responsibilities as shown in Box 2.2. Each responsibility is explained in more detail below.
Box 2.2: Charter of staff ethical responsibilities in HIV-prevention research
Staff have the responsibility to:
- Treat volunteers and colleagues with respect
- Ensure that volunteers understand the study and informed consent materials before and during their participation in clinical research
- Maintain volunteers’ confidentiality
- Ensure volunteers are as safe as possible from biomedical and social harms
- Ensure volunteers’ access to appropriate HIV-prevention methods and health services either on-site or through referral
- Adhere to the study protocol and international standards (e.g. GCP, GCLP, GPP, UNAIDS ethical guidelines)
Explanation of staff ethical responsibilities
Staff in HIV-prevention research have the responsibility to:
- Treat volunteers and colleagues with respect. Staff members should respect the personal choices, values, beliefs, lifestyles and backgrounds of volunteers. They must also do all they can to ensure that volunteers are as comfortable as possible, physically and psychologically, during procedures.
- Ensure volunteers understand the study and informed consent before and during participation. Staff members are responsible for explaining informed-consent principles and information about the study—including objectives, procedures, risks and benefits—in a culturally appropriate manner, using language and formats that the volunteer can understand. It is recommended that staff revisit the informed consent form at least once after the enrollment visit and review it again when new study-related results or other relevant information become available. The need for additional explanation and reiteration of those principles should be assessed on an individual basis (e.g., a volunteer expresses concerns during a counseling session). Staff must also ensure that potential volunteers do not feel pressured or coerced into participating in research.
- Maintain volunteers’ confidentiality. Staff members have the responsibility to protect the privacy of volunteers and keep their information confidential throughout the study and over the course of any follow-up services. In most cases volunteers are identified by number, not name. Staff should ensure recruitment, follow-up, counseling, testing, physical examinations, clinical procedures and medications are provided in a private area where volunteers cannot be seen or overheard by others. Volunteer records are confidential and are shared only as needed to conduct the study. All employees of the research centre (including security guards, drivers, receptionists, and administrative staff) are responsible for keeping volunteer participation confidential and should be trained or sensitized to that effect.
- Ensure volunteers are as safe as possible from biomedical and social harm. Staff members have the responsibility to ensure a safe research centre environment, including effective medical care, infection-prevention and waste-disposal procedures. Clinical staff members have the responsibility to adhere to Good Clinical Practices and Good Clinical Laboratory Practice. The research must be based on sound ethical principles with careful consideration of benefits and risks as established by international and national guidelines. All research centre staff and those conducting outreach are responsible for ensuring that their actions minimize the potential for social harms that volunteers might encounter from participating in HIV-prevention research. Research centres have the responsibility to engage communities and apply, to the extent possible, the recommendations of the Good Participatory Practices.
- **Ensure volunteers’ access to appropriate HIV-prevention methods and health services either on-site or through referral:** Staff members have the responsibility to provide volunteers with:
- Standard HIV-prevention services (appropriate counseling and access to all HIV risk-reduction methods) throughout the study, including new methods as they are scientifically validated or approved and become available.
- Treatment and care for participants who become HIV positive during the study (such services will be provided either at the study centre or through agreements with other facilities; volunteers who screen out of a study because of existing HIV infection also have the right to referrals for these services).
- Treatment, services and follow-up care for study-related illnesses, such as adverse events.
- Appropriate family planning methods counseling for volunteers who are required to avoid pregnancy during participation.
- Special HIV testing at the research centre for any reason—including applications for health or life insurance, travel or employment—should participation in an AIDS vaccine trial result in a false-positive reading in standard HIV tests. Candidate AIDS vaccines often provoke the production of antibodies against key parts of the HIV virus. These antibodies in turn produce an HIV-positive signal on some HIV tests. The detection of such antibodies does not necessarily mean that the individual is infected with HIV. In such cases, additional tests need to be done to discern a false-positive result from a true HIV infection. It is very important to note that in all cases, it is impossible for candidate HIV vaccines themselves to cause HIV infection.
- Referrals for required medical and psychosocial services that are unavailable at the research centre.
- **Adhere to the study protocol and international standards.** Staff members have the responsibility to follow the requirements of the study protocol, including data collection methods, reporting adverse events, providing proper storage of products, maintaining accurate records and ensuring their confidentiality.
______________________________________________________________________
3 Good Participatory Practice: Guidelines for Biomedical HIV Prevention Trials. UNAIDS. 2011. http://data.unaids.org/pub/Manual/2007/jc1364_good_participatory_guidelines_en.pdf SECTION 3: THE HIV-PREVENTION RESEARCH PROCESS
Maintaining high standards of ethics, protecting the rights of volunteers and providing them with quality services should be an integral part of the research process. Although every study is unique, and specifics of the process vary from place to place, most research related to HIV prevention—whether a clinical trial or an epidemiology study—follows the four stages shown in Box 3.1.
HIV-prevention research begins and ends with diligent community engagement. This is achieved mainly by educating people in the community about the proposed research and HIV prevention in general, and via consultative mechanisms such as advisory boards. The objectives of such efforts are to build support for the research and increase knowledge in the community about HIV prevention, learn about the community’s perspectives and needs and support the recruitment and retention of potential volunteers. Note that community engagement is a long-term exercise that continues for the duration of a program of research and is not confined to any particular study protocol.
Stage 1: Formative research and community outreach and recruitment
Collaborating with community stakeholders on formative research activities ensures their perceptions and cultures inform study design and conduct. Community outreach ensures that local populations understand, support and are prepared for the research. The community receives information primarily through seminars, fliers, gatherings and radio announcements, as well as through individual outreach. Providing general education about HIV-prevention research decreases the probability of there being any stigma associated with participation in such research. People who express an interest in participating in the research are invited to visit the research centre for pre-enrollment.
Stage 2: Pre-enrollment
Pre-enrollment begins when a potential volunteer arrives at the research centre. This stage includes informed consent, screening and additional education about the study and the research process. Note that education begins during the community outreach and recruitment stage and continues throughout pre-enrollment and study participation.
Each potential volunteer must give informed consent at pre-enrollment before entering the study. Researchers are responsible for ensuring that each potential volunteer fully understands all aspects of study participation through extensive individual education and group sessions. The informed-consent process during pre-enrollment generally includes the following steps:
- Potential volunteer receives and reviews a copy of the informed-consent form.
- Potential volunteer attends a presentation explaining the study, followed by a group or individual discussion, including a question-and-answer session to clarify key concepts.
Box 3.1: Key stages of HIV-prevention research
Stage 1: Formative research and community outreach and recruitment Stage 2: Pre-enrollment Stage 3: Enrollment/study participation Stage 4: Post-participation follow-up
4 Adapted from IAVI’s AIDS Vaccine Literacy Toolkit At the completion of the question-and-answer session, the potential volunteer has a one-on-one session with a nurse/counselor to receive individual counseling and review the informed consent document again.
Appropriate research centre employee conducts an assessment of understanding to ensure that the potential volunteer fully comprehends key information about participation.
If interested in participating, the potential volunteer signs the informed-consent form and the screening process begins.
The screening process determines whether the individual is eligible to participate in the study. It includes one or more visits, depending on the requirements of the study. During screening, volunteers:
- Receive detailed information on HIV, risk-reduction counseling and family planning counseling when appropriate.
- Complete a pre-screening questionnaire that collects behavioral and basic medical information.
- Undergo an HIV test, including pre- and post-test counseling.
- Undergo additional medical assessments and blood tests when applicable.
If the volunteer is eligible and still wishes to participate, he or she is enrolled in the study. If the volunteer is ineligible, he or she is referred to appropriate services, such as further counseling or HIV treatment, care and support if the person is infected with HIV.
Stage 3: Enrollment/study participation
Only volunteers who have provided informed consent, met all eligibility requirements and expressed the desire to participate are enrolled in the study. In a clinical trial, each volunteer is randomly assigned to receive either the experimental candidate product or a placebo. In most studies volunteers will not know whether they received the candidate product or the placebo until the study is completed.
The volunteer might be required to make several visits to the research centre. At each scheduled visit, a counselor is available to provide HIV risk-reduction counseling. HIV-prevention methods, medical care, psychosocial support and family planning counseling are provided on site or by referral. Ongoing education, including review of the informed-consent materials, also occurs at each visit.
In a clinical trial, staff members collect blood samples from the volunteers at different times. The blood is examined in the laboratory to determine whether the candidate product is safe and elicits a vigorous immune response. In both clinical trials and epidemiology studies, researchers may collect blood samples at various times to test for HIV and other sexually transmitted infections pertaining to eligibility requirements, to enhance understanding of the immune response to HIV infection and to meet other objectives of the specific protocol.
Stage 4: Post-participation: follow-up and access
Staff members may monitor the health of volunteers for a predetermined follow-up period after the study has been completed. Volunteers will continue to receive referrals for off-site counseling and HIV prevention or treatment services, as necessary. They may also be given the opportunity to enroll in additional studies. Researchers communicate the results of the study to the volunteers and the community as soon as such announcements are possible. When appropriate, researchers should involve stakeholders in discussions about access should the product or intervention prove efficacious. This helps sustain the trust and goodwill that allows for future research to take place in that community. Figure 3.1: Key stages of HIV prevention research
1. Formative research and community outreach and recruitment
- Community members are consulted and engaged in the research process. Information about the research is disseminated through seminars, fliers, radio announcements and individual outreach.
- Interested community members are invited to visit the research centre for more information.
2. Pre-enrollment
- Potential volunteer learns more about the research from general information sessions or private discussions with staff at the research centre.
- Understands all details of screening and research study participation; completes pre-screening questionnaire.
- Signs informed consent.
- HIV test with pre- and post-test counseling
- Positive HIV test
- Post-test counseling and referral for care
- If test is negative, screening questionnaire
- Does not meet requirements of study
- Medical history and exam
- Does not meet requirements of study
3. Enrollment / study participation
- Fully eligible, knowledgeable and willing volunteer enters study.
- Random assignment to candidate product or placebo group (clinical study).
- Delivery of study candidate product or placebo (clinical study).
- Medical exam, lab tests, including HIV test with pre- and post-test counseling.
- Volunteer returns for follow-up visits to report on health or problems and/or for further doses/regimen according to protocol.
4. Post-participation: follow-up & access
- Volunteer returns to report on health or concerns.
- Results of the study are communicated to the volunteer, CAB and community.
- Access to trial products and procedures if applicable. SECTION 4: THE QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROCESS: OVERVIEW AND PREPARATIONS
Introduction to the quality improvement process
Implementing QI in prevention research requires a systematic process to monitor, assess and continuously improve the quality of services offered in HIV-prevention research and to promote a participatory approach to problem solving to ensure that services meet the needs and preferences of the volunteers and community. Research-related processes occur both in the community and at the research centre, and the quality of community engagement affects services at the research centre and vice versa. The QI approach in HIV-prevention research thus addresses both community and research centre activities.
Figure 4.1 depicts the continuous four-step QI process and tools used in each step. The process includes:
- Identifying an area to be improved or a problem to be solved
- Analyzing the area to be improved or problem to be solved
- Developing an action plan
- Implementing the action plan
Figure 4.1: The quality improvement (QI) process and tools
Setting the stage for the QI process:
- Prepare research centre managers
- Identify and train QI facilitator
- Hold introductory meeting for research centre staff
- Hold introductory meetings for community agents (non-staff)
- Establish QI committee
- Ensure compliance with local ethics committee requirements, if applicable
The QI Process
Step 1: Identify area to be improved or problem to be solved
Tools:
At research centre level
- Team self-assessment
- Feedback interviews
- Group discussion
- Others as desired
At community level
- Team self-assessment
- Group discussion
- Others as desired
Step 2: Analyze area/problem
- Root-cause analysis
Step 3: Develop action plan
- Sample action plans
Step 4: Implement action plan
Ongoing monitoring and evaluation by the QI committee Setting the stage for the QI process
Preparing research centre managers
Efforts to involve staff in QI are usually successful if such efforts are a high priority for management, and management creates a supportive environment for staff to engage in the process. Initially, some managers might not feel comfortable with participatory approaches to quality, or might not be well equipped to provide effective support for their staff. Lack of awareness regarding the importance of such support and how to provide it, combined with lack of good supervisory skills, sometimes leads to weaknesses in this area. Box 4.1 highlights some of the issues and recommendations that managers should consider to create a supportive and safe environment for staff to be actively involved in QI. These issues also apply to members of the QI committee.
Box 4.1: Creating an environment conducive to good employee performance and quality services:
- **Ensure that there are no negative consequences for positive actions.** Do not punish someone for identifying a problem.
- **Provide feedback to individual employees and teams in a non-judgmental manner.** Avoid resorting to personal criticism.
- **Make sure that all employees know what is expected of them.** Never assume that employees know what is expected of them or how important particular tasks and behaviors are to maintaining high-quality services.
- **Show support for innovation and initiative in employees.** Showing staff members that innovation and initiative are valued will encourage them to participate in the QI process.
- **Cultivate team spirit.** Use language such as, “We face this difficult situation/problem together. Let’s work together to fix it…”
- **Create an environment conducive to learning.** Ensure that there are opportunities for all staff members to receive needed training, including opportunities for professional development. Many people are motivated to improve their performance when they are given opportunities to learn.
- **Take the mental health of staff members seriously.** Ensure staff members receive needed psychological support. Working in HIV-prevention research can be emotionally distressing.
- **Show appreciation to staff members when they exceed expectations.** Be specific so they understand that you have noticed their good work.
- **Take time to listen to staff.** Pay attention to the ideas and opinions of staff members and give them credit when their ideas lead to improvements.
- **Show respect to all levels of staff.** Staff members are your resident experts on their lines of work and often have the best ideas for improvements in their areas of responsibility.
- **Ensure staff members have the infrastructure and materials they need.**
- **Involve staff in finding realistic solutions, and be creative with the resources you have.**
- **Keep your promises to staff.** Credibility, once lost, can be hard to recover.
- **Delegate appropriate tasks.** Most people enjoy solving problems and being in control of their work environment. Delegate responsibilities appropriately, and hold people accountable for what they can realistically accomplish.
______________________________________________________________________
5 This section draws on EngenderHealth’s 1) COPE® Handbook: A Process for Improving Quality in Health Services, 2) Facilitative Supervision, as well as work done by USAID’s MAQ initiative and the PRIME II Project. Managers should keep in mind that some problems exposed in the QI process may reveal flaws in management and may leave them feeling put on the spot. In the end, however, appropriate delegation of tasks and engagement of staff members will lead to a better functioning research centre. And the effectiveness of managers is often reflected in the performance of the people they oversee.
**Identifying, selecting and training an effective QI facilitator**
Identifying an effective facilitator for QI is critical. Depending on the extent to which the research centre has used QI tools, it might already have such a facilitator in all but name. For example, a nurse counselor who is responsible for quality-related issues may be able to use the *Facilitator’s Guide* to initiate QI. If not, the research centre needs to identify one or two facilitators that can be trained. This facilitator should not be a high-level manager; it is important to involve all categories of staff in the QI process, including facilitation. Consider engaging external assistance to train selected facilitator(s), if necessary.
**Criteria for selecting a facilitator:**
- Experience with participatory facilitation
- Understanding of QI or international guidelines (e.g. GCP, GPP)
- Demonstrated commitment to quality
- Well respected by both management and staff
- Good communication and listening skills
- Sufficient influence at the research centre to implement changes
**Preparing to introduce QI to research centre staff and community agents**
Research centre managers and the QI facilitator need to prepare before introducing QI to research centre staff and community outreach workers. This includes holding an introductory meeting for staff, presenting QI tools to staff, forming a QI committee and planning for QI implementation, among other things. Managers and the QI facilitator must familiarize themselves with the entire toolkit. The choice of managers responsible for QI will vary from one research centre to another. Options include the Principal Investigator, Research/Trial Coordinator or Project Director.
**Introductory meeting with research centre staff**
Once the managers and QI facilitator are familiar with the tasks and issues related to introducing QI, it is time to involve research centre staff. The introduction of the process and tools can take place at one or more regular staff meetings or at a special meeting for this purpose (see *Facilitator’s Guide* for different options).
**The QI introductory meeting(s) will aim to ensure that staff members:**
- Understand the definition of QI and its rationale (Section 1)
- Understand that QI is a continuous process (Figure 4.1).
- Are familiar with the proposed Volunteer’s Rights and Responsibilities Framework (Section 1).
- Understand that they will be involved in the QI process and will receive adequate support.
- Establish a set of rules that create an environment conducive to QI (Box 4.1).
- Are familiar with QI tools and have provided suggestions for their appropriate adaptation (Section 5).
- Understand that they will be responsible for using the tools.
- Provide suggestions for effective implementation of QI.
- Recognize issues related to QI sustainability. At the end of this meeting, management and staff will have to decide:
- Which tool(s) to use and how to proceed. Some research centres might decide to use multiple tools concurrently, while others might prefer to use them sequentially.
- A date and time when staff will begin to use the tool(s) (allow time for the appropriate adaptation of tools by staff).
- Whether to first implement QI in the research centre or the community, or both simultaneously.
Introductory meetings with community agents (non-staff)
Some research centres use non-staff community members (e.g., peer leaders, influential network agents/leaders, community advisory board [CAB] members) for community education, community engagement or recruitment (e.g., referrals from existing volunteers, peer recruitment). In this toolkit, such stakeholders are referred to as community agents. The purpose of meeting with community agents is to request specific assistance with strengthening outreach activities. This should be an interactive meeting. Participants should be encouraged to ask questions and engage in open discussion (see Facilitator’s Guide for more details).
Depending on the audience, the QI introductory meeting will aim to ensure that community agents:
- Are aware of the rights and responsibilities of volunteers.
- Are aware of the research centres’ commitment to improving the quality of their services.
- Become more aware of their role in improving quality.
- Become more aware of the QI process and tools.
- Become familiar with the underlying principles that guide QI community tools and QI community activities.
- Recognize that the research centre wants to cultivate an environment conducive to eliciting quality-related feedback.
- Develop rules of conduct for collaboration.
- Become familiar with the research centre’s plans for QI and mechanisms for collecting feedback from them.
At the end of the introductory meeting, the facilitator, the community liaison officers and community agents will:
- Choose which quality-improvement tool to use: community team self-assessment or group discussion (explained below)
- Decide whether to start using the chosen tool immediately (after it has been adapted to suit local needs) or to convene a meeting to apply the tools.
To prepare the diverse groups involved in community outreach for QI, research centres should consider:
- The tools they adopt: Research centres that use different strategies and agents for community outreach will need to determine which tool (community team self-assessment or group discussion) is appropriate for each group and select questions relevant to the role that each plays in community outreach and recruitment.
- Mixed groups or homogenous group: Research centres that use two or more categories of community agents need to decide whether they will conduct community team self-assessment or group discussion with a homogenous group of community agents (e.g., peer leaders, CAB members or peer recruiters only) or with a mixed group of community agents (e.g., representatives from influential networks, peer recruiters, CAB members). Although each research centre will evaluate the suitability of each approach with reference to its needs, all of them must ensure that community agents (especially peer volunteers) are aware that joining the QI process could expose their participation in research and that they provide consent in light of this knowledge before taking part in the team self-assessment or group discussion.
- Selection of individuals for participation in the QI process: Research centres with a large number of peer leaders, peer volunteers or CAB members should select only a few participants. Give priority to individuals who can provide honest feedback, have significant experience in their role and, to the extent possible, are representative of the people who participate in research at the centre. Role of the research centre staff in charge of community outreach (commonly referred to as community liaison officer or CLO): The community liaison officer often works closely with community agents and supervises their work. The role and responsibility of a CLO in the community is similar to that of a manager for QI at the research centre level. He or she must help cultivate an environment that is conducive to QI with community stakeholders and provide support to the QI facilitator(s).
Duration and cost: The introductory meeting and use of one of the community QI tools very likely can take place in one day (see Facilitator’s Guide). However, research centres might have reason to conduct introductory sessions over the course of a few days or hold separate sessions for different types of community agents. If so, research centres that compensate community agents for time spent in training and at meetings will need to keep costs in mind when planning.
Establishing a QI committee At the end of the introductory meetings, the QI facilitator(s) ensures that a QI committee comprising different levels of staff is convened. Depending on the size of the research centre, the QI committee can include the research centre’s QI facilitator and representatives from the following teams: management, counseling, laboratory, clinical, reception and cleaning staff, and from the community outreach team. The QI committee is responsible for sustaining, monitoring and evaluating the QI process. Their main roles are:
- Finalizing the adaptation of tools (including exploring other QI tools as necessary) based on recommendations from the introductory meetings.
- Preparing the initiation of QI based on dates approved by management.
- Supervising the implementation of QI and troubleshooting any process-related challenges.
- Monitoring implementation of action plans.
- Disseminating progress made on QI and appreciations to management, staff, community agents and volunteers.
- Cultivating an environment conducive to QI.
Issues that should be considered regarding the QI committee include:
- Length of time members will serve.
- Method of assigning or electing new members.
- Roles of the different QI committee members. (Do they need to have formal roles, such as secretary, chairperson, general members? Do they establish rules or adopt existing rules for other committees at the research centre? Does the research centre need a standard operating procedure for conducting QI on site?)
- Establishment of a regular meeting schedule to monitor the action plan.
- Method for communicating regularly with those responsible for implementing changes. Committee members need to intervene if a given problem is not being solved. The proposed solution might need to be reconsidered if it cannot be implemented.
- Maintenance of records on solved and unsolved problems.
Ensure compliance with local ethics committee requirements In some contexts, it might be important to ensure that proposed QI activities comply with the requirements and regulations established by local ethics committees. For example, some ethics committees might require a review of any material that requires asking volunteers questions (e.g., feedback interview, group discussion or publishable data resulting from QI activities). Step 1: Identifying area to be improved/problem to be solved
The first step requires research centre staff to apply a tool or combination of the tools, shown in Box 5.1, to identify problems or areas that need improvement. An explanation of these tools follows; various samples of the tools are in Part 2 of the toolkit.
Consideration before selecting tools
Should QI tools be used at the research centre and community levels simultaneously? QI teams are encouraged to use a selection of tools from both categories in Box 5.1 simultaneously, using a team approach to identify problems. This can be valuable because staff members providing research centre services often have insight into the problems and issues raised by those conducting community outreach activities—and vice versa. For example, counselors might be aware of concerns that volunteers have regarding community outreach and be able to contribute to improving the quality of services in this area. Similarly, community outreach workers might be aware of concerns that volunteers have regarding counseling or health care at the research centre, and so provide a completely different perspective to the research centre team. For this approach to work, good communication must be developed, if it does not already exist, between research centre staff and community outreach workers and agents. This ensures that each of the teams is well informed about the activities and challenges of the other. However, this approach can pose challenges for a centre that is new to QI. In such cases, research centres might consider starting the process of problem identification with one category and expanding it to include both as they become familiar with QI processes. Even if problem identification is conducted separately, consider integrating the findings from the two teams in action-plan development and implementation.
How many tools should be used?
All the tools presented in this toolkit do not need to be used during every QI exercise. Apply a feasible number of tools and take on a realistic number of problems during each QI exercise to avoid overwhelming centre staff and outreach workers. Keep in mind that although some proposed solutions could require complex changes, others could be quite simple.
Should the research centre use only the tools mentioned in this toolkit?
There are many other ways to identify problems or areas in need of improvement. The research centre can use tools other than those included in this kit, including those developed by other organizations, and tools designed for a specific purpose (e.g., use of Volunteer Flow Analysis if volunteers’ waiting time is a recurrent problem or has been identified in previous QI exercises). It is also important to note that some problems can still be identified without using the QI tools. When problems are discovered outside regular QI exercises, research centre staff, community workers and managers should follow the problem-analysis process discussed in the next step.
______________________________________________________________________
Box 5.1: Tools included in the toolkit
**Research centre services:**
- Team self-assessment—research centre
- Volunteer feedback interview
- Group discussion
- Others, if desired. For example, volunteer flow analysis (from COPE®)
**Community outreach activities:**
- Team self-assessment—community
- Group discussion
- Others, if desired
______________________________________________________________________
6 If volunteers indicate that waiting times are long, or if staff members identify this as a problem, research centres may use Volunteer Flow Analysis if they think this will contribute to understanding the problem. The COPE methodology has a tool of this kind that may be adapted and used. It can be found at http://www.engenderhealth.org/files/pubs/qi/handbook/cope_handbook-a.pdf Additionally, areas that require improvement often become apparent in a number of ways, including:
- Research centre staff members or those responsible for outreach discover problems as they go about their daily tasks, or they hear rumors in the community about the research centre.
- Volunteers mention concerns or problems they encounter because of research participation.
- Staff members themselves realize that the centre is falling short of its standards, or that its operating procedures are not being closely followed.
**Tool selection and adaptation**
Once the research centre has decided to initiate QI, the QI committee must:
1. **Review all the tools.** An in-depth introduction to the tools is presented on the following pages.
2. **Select the tools to be used.** The recommendation is to combine service provider-oriented tools and volunteer/community-oriented tools at research centre and community levels. For example, research centres can choose to use team self-assessment (a service provider-oriented tool) and one of the volunteer-oriented tools (say, volunteers’ feedback interviews or group discussions) to explore the volunteers’ perspectives during the first and subsequent QI exercises. If the research centre wishes to use additional tools after the first exercise, it may do so. In any case, it should use a variety of tools for different QI exercises to ensure that QI participants remain interested. For example:
- Research centre “A” might start with team self-assessment at the research centre, then conduct volunteer feedback interviews for the first QI exercise. For subsequent QI exercises, it might use group discussion at the research centre and team self-assessment with the community.
- Research centre “B” might conduct volunteer feedback interviews, followed by community team self-assessment for the first QI exercise. For subsequent exercises, it might use team self-assessment at the research centre and group discussion in the community.
- Research centre “C” might start with a team self-assessment at the research centre, followed by a group discussion with selected volunteers. It might then decide to use group discussion in the community, followed with volunteer feedback interviews for the next QI exercise.
3. **Adapt the tools.** Each research centre’s QI committee needs to review the questions and ensure they are appropriate. It should feel free to remove, change or add questions as needed.
4. **Incorporate the process into the work schedule.** Although it is necessary to apply the tools and go through the other steps described in the QI process, disruptions to the research centre and its services can be minimized by adapting and incorporating QI activities into existing meetings and committees.
**Introduction to quality improvement tools**
**Team self-assessment – research centre**
The self-assessment tools in this kit encourage self-assessment in a team or teams (as opposed to individual self-assessment), involving all categories of research centre and community outreach staff.
There are two versions of the team self-assessment tool: one for the research centre, and one for those involved in community outreach. The research centre self-assessment consists of questions that the team and its members ask themselves to capture the volunteers’ experience at the centre as they go from one station to the next for different types of services. “Station” here means a service point (e.g., reception, counseling room, laboratory, exam room, etc.). These questions are devised to reflect national and international standards for conducting clinical research. When staff respond “no” to a question, it is likely that they have identified a problem (see the tools in Part 2).
The team self-assessment should not be used when it interferes with staff performance or volunteer appointments. Team self-assessment should be planned for times when there are few or no scheduled volunteer visits at the research centre. Instructions: How to apply team self-assessment at the research centre
1. **Adapt the team self-assessment tool to fit your program of research.** The QI committee, in collaboration with staff, should adapt the team self-assessment tool to the research in which they’re involved and the populations with which they work. This can be done simply by crossing out questions that are not relevant and skipping them when using the tool. Staff can also add questions that they believe to be relevant to their particular circumstances.
2. **Determine the optimal composition of the QI team.** Depending on the size of the research centre, it might be more effective to divide staff into multiple QI teams when using the team self-assessment tool. QI teams should have a maximum of eight members. If the research centre is small, all or most of the staff can be part of the QI team and use the self-assessment together. If the research centre is large, each department can send a representative to form a QI team. If a QI team is too large (more than eight members), divide it into two smaller teams and assign each to complete part of the tool. To provide an opportunity for everyone to participate and develop professionally, different staff members from departments can take turns being on the teams. Research centres that have community outreach workers as part of the staff team are encouraged to involve them in this team self-assessment. As research centres become more experienced in using the self-assessment tool, they may consider whether to engage community agents, potential volunteers (e.g., community members who attended education sessions, screening visits, and those who opted not to enroll), volunteers who dropped out of a study or enrolled volunteers in subsequent self-assessment exercises to identify problems.
3. **Determine the most appropriate and efficient way to conduct team self-assessment.** Choose one of these options, depending on the size of the research centre:
- In the case where all or most research centre staff constitute one QI team, the team uses the self-assessment together, answering the questions through discussion as they visit one station after another (mostly following the volunteer’s typical progress) over one or several days, as time permits.
- In the case of multiple teams composed of departmental representatives, each team can be assigned a section of the self-assessment and the corresponding station to visit. Each team should complete the general part of the self-assessment in addition to the assigned section. This means that there are several QI team members working in different areas. However, each team must ensure that it has adequate competency to review the area(s) in the centre that it visits, and that its membership represents all categories of staff (e.g., the team cannot consist of managers only).
4. **Introduce the process and prepare QI team.** Have the QI team members reflect on the traits and needs of the current cohort of volunteers in the context of national/international standards. Go from station to station, completing the questions on the assigned section of the self-assessment by interacting with staff at each location. In addition, the QI team should observe quality-related issues at each station (e.g., crowded reception area, cleanliness, privacy). In the case of small research centres, where the QI team is composed of all staff, at least one staff member should be present at each station (e.g., at least one counselor should be at the counseling station) to respond to questions from the QI team. Then that person can rejoin the QI team when it moves to the next station.
**Role of research centre staff at each station**
The staff at the station should answer questions posed by the QI team objectively. They should be prepared to provide additional insights, documentation and data if needed. Co-workers and peers from other departments are more likely to see the different stations with fresh eyes.
**Role of the QI team**
The QI teams should encourage those working at each station to identify problems. If staff are unable to do so, team members should ask open-ended questions (beginning with words such as “what” or “how”) to explore issues. Possible questions include:
- How do you think volunteers feel about privacy in the reception area?
- What do you think volunteers feel when they see, for example, a photo of a person dying of AIDS in a physician’s room, a stigmatizing poster, a lengthy informed-consent form, etc.?
- What do you do to make people comfortable before drawing blood? How do you think volunteers react to all the blood samples when they enter the laboratory? (if blood samples are visible).
How do you think volunteers feel about picking up condoms from the reception area?
Role of research centre and QI teams when volunteers and community agents are involved
As mentioned previously, research centres with extensive experience in QI might want to include community agents in their self-assessment. Here are some considerations:
- The QI committee should adapt the process as needed.
- The QI team facilitating this process must listen to the volunteers/community agents and encourage them to speak. Research centre staff on the QI team should not identify problems during this visit, but leave that to the volunteers/community agents, only asking questions as necessary. Staff at each station visited should do the same.
- The QI committee should adapt the tools as needed. The QI team should change the questions in the team self-assessment to ensure they are of relevance to the respondents. If the QI team does not receive adequate feedback from the respondents, they can consider open-ended questions. Appropriate open-ended questions with volunteers, potential volunteers and community agents include: “How can we make the services volunteers receive more friendly and meet the needs of this population?” “What information is needed to ensure true informed consent?” Other possible open-ended questions can be adapted from those listed on the group discussion tool (without making it a group discussion) later in this section.
- Staff at each station must never become defensive when volunteers or community agents identify a problem. Similarly, staff should do all they can to avoid making volunteers and community agents defensive.
- Staff should not make promises the research centres cannot keep. For example, if volunteers request more money for their participation or make other suggestions that conflict with ethical standards and policies or are unaffordable or impossible for the research centre to fulfill, the team should immediately and clearly explain why such changes are not possible.
- In the end, staff should thank the volunteers and community agents for helping the research centre make improvements, and explain how their suggestions will be used and how they might be made aware of the steps taken to improve the services. The timing for follow-up will depend on the problems identified. If the research centre has decided to use the bulletin board to communicate changes, encourage volunteers or community agents to check the bulletin board.
Interpretation of answers and identification of areas to improve
A “no” response to a question on the team self-assessment indicates a need for improvement. In some instances, team members will be divided between “yes” and “no.” At such times, teams should try to build consensus and ask the staff at the station to clarify issues. In general, if there is lack of consensus, consider the question as a problem identified until proved otherwise. If no problems are identified at the station, the QI team should ask questions such as:
- Are there any improvements you have wanted to make in the work here but have not been able to?
- Do you have any concerns that were not raised by the team?
- Is there an area you would like to work on to provide (even) better services?
- Is there an area that you are particularly proud of? How did you accomplish that?
Documentation of outcomes
The visiting QI team makes a note of the problem(s) identified and areas to be improved. When staff members become more proficient, they may develop good problem statements and conduct root-cause analysis as they go about identifying areas to be improved, particularly for less complicated problems. (This is explained in Step 2 of the QI process).
A suggestion for managers and QI facilitators
Managers and QI facilitators should generally leave problem identification to staff. However, if they notice a problem that has not been identified, they should ask open-ended questions rather than point out the problem: e.g. “What do you think about all the blood samples clients see as soon as they arrive in the laboratory? How will they feel?” or “What do you think about the cleanliness of the toilets used by volunteers? How would you feel about using them?” “How do you feel about the way that volunteers coming for CD4 count are seated separately by the receptionist?” Team self-assessment – community
Many of the challenges and problems faced by research centres arise from conditions prevailing in the surrounding communities. Often, community agents learn of volunteers’ concerns related to understanding of the study objectives, confidentiality, quality of services and stigma and discrimination in the community. Community agents can also perpetuate misinformation about the study, and might compromise confidentiality and the safety of volunteers if they have not been well trained. For these reasons, community agents should always be involved in a research centre’s QI initiatives.
Self-assessment at the community level is challenging because of the cultural and social diversity in any given community. Most of the principles that guide team self-assessment at the research centre apply at the community level. However, self-assessment questions at the community level will stress outreach activities, engagement strategies and education tools, as opposed to the process flow from one station to the next at the research centre. Each research centre should determine the benefit of engaging community agents in the team self-assessment, either with community outreach staff or separately. (See tool in Part 2).
Instructions: How to apply team self-assessment at the community level
1. Decide who will facilitate the first exercise. This could be the research centre’s QI facilitator, along with a selected community outreach staff member (e.g., senior community outreach staff, community liaison officer etc.) and representative from management. However, if the CLO is a trained QI facilitator, he or she can serve as the person who regularly conducts self-assessment with other community outreach staff or community agents during routine monthly or quarterly meetings.
2. Review and adapt the self-assessment tool. Adapt the tool for community outreach activities. Select only relevant questions or develop additional questions as needed.
3. Follow steps as described under self-assessment at research centre, where appropriate. Volunteer feedback interview
The Volunteer Feedback Interview (sometimes called “volunteer exit interview” or “feedback form”) is commonly used to explore volunteer perspectives on research centre services. Although it is common for research centres to administer a volunteer exit interview at the end of a study, a volunteer feedback interview is intended to gather feedback while volunteers are participating in the study. This is of value because volunteers’ opinions about their experiences often shape their decisions to participate, continue to participate or advocate for the study or research centre in the community. For better representation of volunteers’ opinions and perspectives, research centres should target potential volunteers, enrolled volunteers and those who have dropped out when possible.
Feedback interviews should include questions that are quantitative and qualitative, closed and open-ended. Although each participant might have a different perspective on services and activities, the feedback interview provides a basis for discovering common trends, and identifying strengths and areas for improvement.
Staff must choose whether the interviews should be conducted by other staff members or an independent QI consultant. Samples of different feedback interviews are included in Part 2. Research centres determine how many feedback interviews are administered, and how often, based on the study schedule, number of targeted volunteers for screening and number of volunteers needed for the study. The QI committee should determine the frequency, target volunteers (potential volunteers or enrolled volunteers) and target number, making sure that the resulting volume of data will not overwhelm the QI team.
Unlike the self-assessment tool, feedback interviews are recommended for use at the research centre only.
Instructions: How to apply the volunteer feedback interview
1. Adapt the feedback interview. The QI committee should select which type of feedback interview to use and determine how it may be adapted to suit the needs of the research centre. The tool should be simplified whenever possible. For example, if a study does not require family planning, the feedback interview might not need to have questions on this topic.
2. Determine the purpose. The rationale for frequency and target number of feedback interviews will depend on each research centre’s needs. Research centres that conduct multiple studies over long time frames (two to three years) might choose to conduct routine feedback interviews (adapting them to different studies or cohorts) while research centres that are conducting single studies for short time frames (12 to 18 months) might choose to conduct one feedback interview at the beginning and another toward the end of the study.
3. Prepare the interviewer. The QI committee should determine whether to use a staff member or an independent QI consultant to conduct the interview, and make appropriate preparations (e.g., space for interview, means of informing staff and volunteers about the exercise, etc.). The QI committee must ensure that the person conducting the interview understands the feedback form, as well as the concerns of the research centre and the social and cultural context in which the interview is being conducted. Preparation could include basic information on counseling processes and available care at the research centre, confidentiality, research centre study processes, principles of QI (purpose, methods and tools), strategies
Box 5.3: Advantages and disadvantages of conducting team self-assessment at the community level
Advantages: Team self-assessment at the community level has many of the same benefits as self-assessment at the research centre—and a few additional ones:
- Community outreach staff and community agents are sensitized about quality and empowered to devise strategies to improve community education, recruitment and engagement through a retrospective assessment of their activities.
- When used with additional stakeholders, community self-assessment can enhance trust and ownership of research and facilitate input on areas for improvement.
Disadvantages:
- Challenges associated with convening people for an exercise that might take significantly longer than a group discussion.
- Difficulty of involving community agents or stakeholders without unduly raising their expectations. for creating rapport and ensuring a sense of safety with volunteers, communication skills and need for standardization in administration of feedback interviews. The interviewer should pre-test the interview with at least four QI committee members before conducting feedback interviews with volunteers.
4. **Conduct the interview.** The interview should take place in a private area. The QI committee needs to ensure that the person conducting the interview carefully explains the purpose of the interview, obtains permission from the volunteer as needed, informs the volunteer that his or her name will not be used, and explains that the volunteer can stop the interview at any time with no repercussions. The interviewer must put the volunteer at ease and listen carefully to what the volunteer has to say, and must document the volunteer’s comments. At the end, the interviewer should thank the volunteer.
5. **Disseminate the data.** The QI committee should design simple tools to analyze data (e.g., Excel-generated spreadsheets) and disseminate data (e.g., Excel-generated or hand drawn graphs, PowerPoint presentations) gathered through the feedback interviews. As with the team self-assessments, the QI committee should convene a staff meeting (or reserve time during a staff meeting) to present the results of the interviews, including problems identified, areas needing improvement in the action plan(s) and areas found to be in compliance with quality standards and meeting volunteers’ satisfaction. This can be done with the dissemination of team self-assessment exercises if a research centre has decided to conduct team self-assessments and feedback interviews at the same time.
6. **Analyze the data.** The data must be studied carefully before problem analysis can take place among staff. The QI committee and staff should also discuss whether there are issues identified in the feedback interview they do not understand. This might include an area identified as a big problem by volunteers (e.g., avoid tribalism, racism, discrimination) or a recurring suggestion that is unclear (e.g., consider the needs of people like us) and explore ways to gain additional insights into those issues. In some cases, the QI committee might recommend the use of additional tools to improve their understanding of issues revealed through the feedback interviews. For example, they can recommend the use of team self-assessment with volunteers in a walk-through at the research centre (as described above), or they can conduct a targeted group discussion (discussed later in this section).
7. **Show appreciation for volunteer feedback and recommendations.** The QI committee should consider the best ways to communicate results to volunteers. Volunteers need to know that their input is appreciated and has been taken into account to improve services. This can be done through “thank you for helping us serve you better” messages at the reception, or by posting findings and actions on a bulletin board or in counseling rooms.
______________________________________________________________________
**Box 5.4: Advantages and disadvantages of the volunteer feedback interview**
**Advantages:**
- Helps research centre staff make improvements that are important to volunteers.
- Leads to improvements that staff might not have thought of on their own.
- Provides a learning experience for staff (when they conduct the interviews) by raising their awareness of volunteer perspectives. This direct experience is often more instructive than being told by an outsider what the volunteers said.
**Disadvantages:**
- Volunteers might not be willing to speak openly—to either an independent QI interviewer or a staff member.
- There is a perception that volunteers might not want to spend the extra time required for an interview. However, at research centres that have conducted feedback interviews, more than 98% of volunteers that were approached were willing to provide feedback.
- Challenges with sustainability if the research centre uses an independent QI interviewer.
- Requisite technical skills for basic quantitative and qualitative data analysis may be hard to find.
______________________________________________________________________
7 Prince Ngongo Bahati et al. Ensuring quality of services in HIV prevention research settings: findings from a multi-centre quality improvement pilot in East Africa. AIDS Care. 2010. Vol 22, issue 1 pp119-125. **Group discussion**
Group discussions allow the research centre to explore the perspectives of volunteers or community agents in more depth. Group discussions for QI purposes are relatively less demanding than a focus group discussion organized for research purposes. Group discussions for QI should seek to address a reasonable number of questions and issues so as to allow sufficient time to explore each in the depth required. Group discussion promotes better understanding of the opinions, preferences and challenges regarding quality of services and experiences at a research centre. For example, research centre staff might learn that there are rumors in the community about the research being done at the centre, and want to learn more about what people are saying. Or the research centre might have received information in the suggestion box (suggestion boxes are discussed later in this section) or from volunteer feedback interviews that needs further analysis. Even if it is not possible or desirable to find the person who provided the suggestion, other volunteers might be able to shed light on the issue. In-depth information helps inform possible interventions and ensures that such measures make the kinds of improvements that volunteers and community agents actually had in mind.
Note that this tool can be used by both research centre staff and community outreach staff to explore the views of volunteers, potential volunteers and community agents (see sample questionnaire in Part 2).
**Considerations before conducting a group discussion**
1. **Select a facilitator and an assistant.** This will often be the research centre’s QI facilitator. A staff member who can assist the facilitator by taking notes, keeping track of time and helping to manage the group should also be identified. Some research centres have obtained better outcomes (based on volunteer assessments) when they use an outsider to facilitate group discussions. Consider using an internal staff member who does not professionally interact with volunteers (e.g., a data clerk, pharmacist, etc.) to conduct the discussions.
2. **Determine the target group.** Make sure the participants are likely to be comfortable with each other. To facilitate open dialogue, the research centre might want to avoid mixing people from different cohorts, such as, sex workers, discordant couples or men who have sex with men. The centre may also choose to avoid mixing men and women, or young and old participants in group discussions, especially if they have reason to believe that a diverse spectrum of gender identities, sexual orientations and ages is likely to impede open discussion.
3. **Ensure participation is voluntary.** When selecting participants, emphasize that participation is voluntary and will not affect a volunteer’s involvement or potential to be involved in a study.
4. **Select an appropriate group size.** Generally, the group should include a minimum of six and a maximum of 15 people to ensure that everyone has the opportunity to participate in the discussion in a meaningful way. Research centres conducting small studies can convene discussion groups with smaller numbers of volunteers or community agents when appropriate.
5. **Prepare questions.** Prepare appropriate questions to obtain the information required (see suggestions in Part 2 and adapt as needed).
**Note:** The questions developed for group discussion can also be used in an informal, non-structured one-on-one interview by staff if confidentiality is an issue, or if it is difficult to convene a group.
______________________________________________________________________
**Instructions: How to conduct group discussions**
01. **Welcome and introductions.** Welcome the group, introduce the facilitator and any assistant(s), make other introductions as desired (use first names only), and explain the purpose of the discussion.
02. **Ensure participation is voluntary.** Emphasize that participation is voluntary and that anyone is free to leave at any time without consequence.
03. **Emphasize confidentiality.** Assure participants that their names will not be used in the notes. The notes help document the suggestions and opinions that will guide the research centre in improving its services.
04. **Warm-up.** As a warm-up, consider introducing the volunteers’ rights and responsibilities framework and ask participants their opinions about it. Alternatively, use any other warm-up of your choice.
05. **Create ground rules.** Encourage the group to develop ground rules for the discussion, and make sure to stress the importance of respecting confidentiality and the opinions of other participants. Other rules might include, for example, not interrupting one another, etc.
06. **Listen carefully.** Listen to the participants’ responses and to the discussion as it develops.
07. **Delve deeper.** Ask open-ended questions to obtain more information (such as “what do you think about...?” or “how do you think this problem can be solved...?” or “how does that make you feel...?” “what other reasons are there for...?”).
08. **Moderate responses.** Ensure that everyone has a turn to speak if they want to, and try to avoid having one person dominate the discussion by asking others questions directly or setting the stage for others to talk (“Let’s see what the others think about that” or “Akinyi, what is your opinion on...?”).
09. **Enforce the rules.** If conflict arises, encourage the group to help enforce the rules established by the group.
10. **Avoid arguments.** Do not argue with the participants. If necessary, make sure that someone from the research centre with technical competence is present to correct misinformation.
11. **Do not make promises.** Do not make promises the research centre cannot keep, and correct unrealistic expectations among the participants about the outcomes of the discussion.
12. **Thank the group.** At the end of the discussion, thank the group for participating and for their openness.
13. **Communicate results.** Explain how you will communicate results from the discussion, if appropriate, and whether interventions will follow as a result of the discussion.
**Different options to consider for group discussions**
- Discussions can be planned for specific groups of volunteers. For example, if the research centre would like to recruit more young women, outreach workers could approach specific enrolled volunteers or young women in the community and invite them to a group discussion on a particular topic, such as the quality of the information and educational materials provided by the centre.
- Group discussions can also be organized around recruitment activities, information sessions or other events as long as the purpose of the discussion is clear and the facilitator is prepared. For example, during a community gathering, outreach staff might ask a few people to stay after the event (consider providing incentives such as tea and refreshments or additional items that research centres use, e.g. condoms, packets of water-based lubricant, T-shirts or pens with HIV-prevention messages, etc.). Outreach staff can then start a group discussion about the community education session the volunteers just attended, as well as potential misinformation and community concerns.
- Counselors can be asked to identify volunteers with a particular profile and ask them to join a discussion group planned for later that day. Community agents can also be involved in group discussions after community education or recruitment events if appropriate.
**Box 5.5: Advantages and disadvantages of the group discussion**
**Advantages:**
- People feel safer and more willing to open up when they are in a group.
- Respondents often react to other participants and share ideas and observations that they might not have had in a one-on-one interview.
- Provides in-depth information and an opportunity for immediate clarification.
- The experience often raises the awareness of staff.
**Disadvantages:**
- Requires a skilled facilitator to maintain order and make it a pleasant experience for all.
- Might need to schedule a special visit for volunteers or have community agents travel to participate in the group discussion.
- Requires careful consideration if there is an issue of confidentiality for the target group. **Suggestion boxes**
Many research centres use suggestion boxes to obtain ideas from volunteers and staff.
**Instructions: How to use suggestion boxes**
1. Place the suggestion box in an area outside the view of those in the waiting room.
2. Ensure that there is always a pencil and paper by the suggestion box.
3. Encourage people to provide suggestions by having staff indicate the option is available.
4. Encourage staff to use the suggestion box between QI exercises if they do not want to make a suggestion in front of others.
5. Designate a staff member to collect and review the suggestions regularly.
**Box 5.6: Advantages and disadvantages of using suggestion boxes**
**Advantages:**
- Requires minimal staff time.
- Easy to implement.
- Conveys to volunteers and staff that the research centre values feedback.
**Disadvantages:**
- Response rate is often low.
- Comments received are varied and not focused on a specific area.
- It can be difficult to interpret suggestions and target responses if the same suggestion box is used by staff and volunteers.
- Requires a cohort of literate volunteers to be effective. Step 2: Analyzing areas to be improved/problems to be solved
Once these tools have been used to identify problems or areas to be improved, the QI facilitator, with the help of the QI committee, schedules a meeting at the research centre to analyze the findings and determine root causes of identified problems. In preparation for this meeting, the QI team(s) should develop a list of these problems. They should seek agreement among team members on whether these are truly problems. If there is disagreement, they need to consider why there is disagreement, and how to proceed:
- Is there disagreement between the findings from different tools? (For research centres that use multiple tools or tools at multiple levels)
- Is the issue a difference of perspective between the volunteer and research centre staff?
- Is more information needed?
For research centres that have multiple QI teams, a comparison of findings made by the different teams might clarify a disagreement or confirm the problem. The list of problems might be long, which can discourage staff, so it might be necessary to prioritize items in the action plan (the next step of the QI process).
Using “multiple whys”
During the first exercise, research centre and community outreach staff will probably need help in formulating good problem statements and executing root-cause analyses. In this manual we will use a simple technique called “multiple whys” or “three whys.” If the team runs out of answers to “why” questions, they should ask “what other reasons are there?” (see Box 5.7). Stop if the responses touch on factors that are beyond the control of the research centre. Once problems have been identified and prioritized, and their root causes identified (both those that are within the control of research centre and those that are not), the next step is to develop an action plan.
Box 5.7: Formulation of problem statements and the use of multiple whys
Example
Group discussion: Discovery: In a recent group discussion, several volunteers expressed that they are too embarrassed to pick up condoms in the reception area, where everyone can see them.
Potential statement: Most (10 of 15) volunteers at the group discussion stated that they are too embarrassed to pick up condoms in the reception area, where everyone can see them.
Why do most volunteers and potential volunteers not want to pick up condoms in the waiting room? Because they do not have privacy and are embarrassed.
Why do they not have privacy? Because staff did not identify a private area for condom pick-up.
Why didn’t they select a private area? Because the research centre does not have much space to allocate as private areas.
What other reasons are there? Other staff (e.g., cleaners, other counselors) were not involved in the decision about the choice of the distribution area. Counselors do not extensively explore barriers to the use of condoms when they conduct counseling on condom use.
This root cause opens the door for possible solutions that are feasible and inexpensive and over which the research centre has control.
Why else might volunteers feel embarrassed about picking up condoms in the waiting room? Because of the stigma attached to condoms in our society.
Why? Because men use them with sex workers, not with their wives.
This root cause is more difficult for the research centre to take action on and see immediate results.
Continue formulating problem statements and “multiple whys” until you have one or more root causes where interventions are feasible for the research centre or outreach workers and where they are likely to see results. For more examples of how QI discovery can be used to practice formulation of a problem statement and multiple whys, see Facilitator’s Guide; Handout #13. Step 3: Developing an action plan
An action plan documents a problem and the steps that will be taken to improve the issue and keep it from recurring. The plan should be written, and templates are provided later in this section. Developing an action plan entails:
1. Identifying issues discovered in Step 2 of the QI process.
2. Formulating and selecting appropriate actions.
3. Assigning actions to appropriate staff members.
4. Determining a date by which the action will be completed.
Preparing for the action plan meeting
1. A small centre can choose to have one or several meetings for all staff. A larger facility might have this activity take place within each department, with assistance from the QI facilitator.
2. Decide on an action plan format (see samples at the end of this section). Make sure there is a person assigned to implement each remedy (distribute responsibilities fairly) and a date by which the required steps are to be completed.
3. Discuss plans to evaluate the outcome.
4. Discuss how the QI committee will monitor progress. In larger centres, the committee needs to work closely with each department and delegate some of this responsibility.
5. Inform staff when you plan to do the next QI exercise.
The action plan can be any format, but it should include the components mentioned above. If desired, each problem can be on one or several sheets of paper and placed in a binder that all staff members or each department can access. It can also contain an outcome section so that the research centre can keep track of progress and assist with monitoring. See Boxes 5.8 and 5.9 for suggested formats. For the purpose of illustration, the problem related to insufficient privacy for condom pick-up presented earlier is used in these samples. The research centre should select and adapt the format that best fits their needs.
Designing and selecting appropriate interventions
Much consultation will go into the design of most interventions. The staff likely to be affected by the changes must be included in the design and development of action plans, because their input is typically invaluable to the formulation of practical and effective solutions. For example, if volunteers express concerns about the ability of receptionists to maintain confidentiality, receptionists need to be involved in analyzing the problem and developing a solution.
Note: Interventions should be designed to not only solve a problem but to prevent that problem from recurring.
Many effective interventions can be implemented at little or no cost and with minimal effort. In fact, the problem in Box 5.7 can be solved, at least partly, by leaving condoms in bathrooms, where volunteers can pick them up without being observed.
The problem of a lack of privacy in condom access could also lead to changes in counseling: counselors might emphasize to all clients that condoms are not exclusively for use with sex workers and for heterosexual men only, but are to be used as a precaution by all. Counselors might additionally decide to explore barriers to condom use and provide the condoms directly to volunteers during their sessions. Another staff member, perhaps a member of the cleaning crew, might assume responsibility for checking and refilling condom containers in the bathrooms. The problem could also require changing the information provided to the community to reduce the stigma associated with condoms. These interventions might not require any new skill sets, training or infrastructure.
Avoid selecting and developing interventions that are more expensive than necessary. Examples include use of training when it is not appropriate, changes to infrastructure when the process can be changed at less cost, etc. Research centre managers should, however, be supportive when there is a genuine need for additional resources.
Sound analyses and appropriate interventions help avoid unnecessary expense and waste. Keep in mind that the goal is to develop the most effective, least costly and least labor-intensive solutions. If there are many problems, set priorities and a realistic timeline for addressing them. Identifying a few “quick wins”—simple changes that can be made quickly at low or no cost—is a good way to start.
If staff members at a specific station are not able to address problems that have been identified, flag them as areas to be improved and ask medical staff, counselors, laboratory technicians, pharmacists or other experts with relevant technical competence to work on the issue.
Although research centres have limited control over what happens in the communities around them, interventions at the community level are extremely important. Outreach workers should take care to establish creative partnerships for specific QI interventions and build enduring relationships with appropriately selected community groups and organizations. Keep in mind that it can take time to see results from community-level interventions.
Sometimes interventions will need to be revised due to unacceptably high costs or other considerations. Don’t rush the process.
The design of some interventions will continue to evolve even after research centre staff have developed an action plan. Box 5.8: Sample action plan format 1
**ACTION PLAN**
**Date problem was identified:** 1 September 2011
**Problem identified:** Most volunteers at the group discussion stated that they are too embarrassed to pick up condoms in the reception area of the research centre.
**Root cause 1:** Staff did not provide private areas to make condoms available.
**Proposed intervention:** W.C. (QI facilitator) will identify private areas within the research centre by 15 September 2011. T.K. (cleaner) will ensure there are condoms (both male and female) in bathrooms and in a visible area in counseling rooms by 30 September 2011. Management will ensure adequate supply of female condoms from the ministry of health (ongoing).
**Actually completed:** 15 September 2011
**Root cause 2:** Counselors do not routinely explore barriers to condom use with volunteers during counseling sessions.
**Proposed intervention:** J.O. and R.Z. (counselor supervisors) will conduct a special session on condoms (male condoms, female condoms, condom use by men who have sex with men) during the next monthly counseling supervision, to be scheduled by 30 September 2011.
**Actually completed:** 30 September 2011
**Root cause 3:** There is stigma attached to condoms in the community because people think men use condoms for sex with sex workers. Most men who have sex with men think condoms are for sex between a man and a woman, not between two men. Female condoms are not always available and women are embarrassed to take them.
**Proposed intervention:** 1) R.O. (nurse counselor) will work with the other counselors to include specific, culturally sensitive discussion guides on condom use in counseling sessions (by 25 October 2011, after next month’s counseling supervision).
**Actually completed:** 30 October 2011
**Proposed intervention:** 2) S.K. and L.H. (nurse counselor and outreach worker supervisor) will guide outreach workers to be more specific when they discuss condom use for HIV prevention in the community (by 15 October 2011).
**Actually completed:** 8 October 2011
**Proposed intervention:** 3) M.T. (trial coordinator) and S.K. (community liaison officer) will review the posters on condoms used by the research centre to identify parts that may be confusing, evaluate whether the posters are appropriate for the newly developed cohort (men who have sex with men) and propose suggestions for improvement (by 25 October 2011).
**Actually completed:** 30 October 2011
**Intervention outcomes:** The issue of privacy was discussed at the staff meeting, and the discussion continued among staff who decided to take other actions. T.K. worked with the pharmacist to find containers in the storage area, filled them with condoms and placed them in each counseling room and bathroom. After the condoms ran out in the counseling rooms a few times, he decided the containers need to be checked daily and refilled as needed. Counselors state that they now always have condoms in the counseling rooms. More female condoms are being taken by the volunteers (T.K. estimates the use of three boxes of 200 condoms a week and recommends ordering at least 20 boxes a month).
R.O. has facilitated role-playing with the other counselors and has developed a script for the counselors to use to ensure that they are specific in their information about condoms in order to decrease the stigma associated with their use.
S.K. and L.H. held a session with the outreach workers to address stigma. They have made some additions (e.g., condoms and anal sex) to what they say about condoms, according to L.H., who has accompanied several outreach workers when they organize information sessions in the community.
M.T. and S.K. have presented suggestions to management for making current posters MSM-friendly while ensuring that volunteers’ safety is not compromised and that the material conforms with the law of the land.
### Box 5.9: Sample action plan format 2
| Problem | Cause(s) | Recommended intervention | By whom | By when | Date completed | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------|---------------|----------------| | Most volunteers at the group discussion stated that they are too embarrassed to pick up condoms in the reception area of the research centre, where everyone can see them | No extensive consultation on private areas was conducted among staff before deciding on the reception area | Discuss importance of privacy at next staff meeting, and identify private areas where condoms can be distributed | W.C. (QI facilitator) | 02 June 2011 | 10 July 2011 | | Counselors do not extensively and routinely explore barriers to condom use with volunteers | | Ensure there are condoms in counseling rooms and bathrooms | T.K. (cleaner) | 05 June 2011 | 05 June 2011 | | Stigma attached to condoms in the community | | Facilitate a session on condom use during monthly counseling support supervision | J.O. and R.R. (counselor supervisors) | 25 June 2011 | 20 June 2011 | | Posters on condom use received from the Ministry of Health do not address specific needs of men who have sex with men | | Develop a counseling guide on condom use | R.Z. (nurse counselor) | 30 June 2011 | 30 June 2011 | | | | Provide outreach workers with guidance on being more specific when they discuss condom use for HIV prevention | S.K. & L.H. (nurse counselor & outreach worker supervisor) | 25 June 2011 | 30 June 2011 | | | | Review posters and propose changes | M.T. and S.K. | 05 June 2011 | June 10 2011 |
______________________________________________________________________
8 The COPE® process uses this action plan format and recommends that the action plan should be on a wall for all to see. See earlier reference to COPE® in the Introduction and Section I. Step 4: Implementing the action plan
QI-related interventions are similar to other interventions in terms of implementation, monitoring and evaluation. What is different with a QI action plan is that more staff are involved and assigned responsibilities. Implementation of the action plan takes time, and the QI team should convene periodically to monitor implementation and identify additional problems and interventions.
During monitoring, consider these questions at regular intervals:
- Is the problem being solved? If not, why not?
- Did the centre select the correct interventions? Are additional interventions needed?
- Does the person responsible need help? If yes, what are the results and how are they being recorded?
- Have any new problems developed as a result of the interventions?
Many issues require attention as implementation proceeds and QI is institutionalized. Everything will not and cannot be settled immediately. In a large centre, the QI committee must work closely with department heads to ensure that they are involved and supportive during implementation. In small and large centres, QI committee members must have the flexibility and time to take on their new responsibilities.
Measuring improvement
Organizations often try to measure too much, which takes time and can be costly. If the indicators selected are of questionable value, the research centres will waste time and resources that could be spent on more useful activities. It is, however, very important to examine trends as more QI exercises are implemented to ensure that areas needing improvement have been dealt with and that action plans were effective.
For this reason, after careful consideration pick a few good indicators and be open to the possibility of combining or complementing quantifiable indicators with other qualitative issues. Box 5.10 presents possible indicators. Some might be collected through existing data as part of research protocol (e.g., behavioral or medical data). If so, it is not necessary to collect them again with the QI tools described in this kit. Nevertheless, such data can inform the QI process and confirm the findings of the exercises.
Quantitative indicators
The indicators on the next page focus on examples of outcomes associated with quality HIV-prevention research. Some research centres might choose to ask specifically about satisfaction with services. While they do not measure volunteer satisfaction or cause-effect relationships, they provide insight into volunteers’ compliance to the goals and objectives of the research.
However, the concept of quality changes over time, and research centres will need to adjust their action plans continually to meet the changing needs of volunteers within available resources.
The indicators in Box 5.10 represent just some of the examples of ways research centres can measure success of quality-improvement programs. Box 5.10: Quantitative indicators
Collecting and analyzing data can be time-consuming. For this reason, it is a good idea to keep the number of quantitative indicators to a minimum. An indicator is generally expressed as a number or percentage. The indicators selected should be in an area that is important and where performance is relatively low.
A) Examples of measurable indicators that can be collected from volunteers through feedback interviews:
- % of volunteers enrolled (or members within the selected volunteers in group discussion) who can report that they understand study objectives or % of volunteers who have correctly described the study objectives
- % of volunteers enrolled (or of selected volunteers in a group discussion) who report receiving counseling on condom use and being offered condoms at each visit
- % of volunteers enrolled who state they have no concerns about confidentiality at the research centre
- % of volunteers enrolled who state they are satisfied with privacy during medical exam, counseling or both
- % of volunteers enrolled who state that a research centre staff member has revisited their consent to participate at least once after enrollment
- % of volunteers enrolled who state that they were reminded of “unknown efficacy” of the investigational product or HIV-prevention tool
- % of volunteers enrolled (or of selected volunteers in a group discussion) who state their medical complaints have been promptly and effectively attended
- % of volunteers enrolled (or of selected volunteers in a group discussion) who report that they have not been discriminated against by research centre staff based on race, social status, sexual orientation, behavior or profession
- % of volunteers enrolled (or of selected volunteers in a group discussion) who report that they are given adequate opportunity to ask questions and report concerns about their participation
B) Examples of quality indicators that can be collected through other research centre study tools/forms:
- % of female volunteers using and adhering to an effective method of family planning (in research where this is a requirement)
- % of female volunteers dropping out because of pregnancy (if this incident happens relatively frequently)
- % of volunteers who adhere to prescribed regimen related to the investigational product (e.g. PrEP, microbicides) or drugs prescribed by trial physicians
- % of volunteers provided with referrals who used those referrals
- % of volunteers who remain in the study until the end (retention rate)
There are many other possible indicators. It is up to each research centre to choose which ones they prefer to use. Means to complement these quantifiable indicators with qualitative observations are explored in the tools (group discussion and feedback interviews). Final considerations on the QI process
How often should QI exercises take place? It is important not to lose momentum after a QI exercise, and to steadily implement the action plan and monitor its progress. It is also important to add problems identified between QI exercises to the action plan. When many of the problems in the action plan have been solved, it might be time for the next QI exercise. QI exercises should be organized regularly but should be planned in accordance with study schedules and in sync with volunteers’ scheduled visits. HIV-prevention research centres that have conducted QI recommend that exercises be conducted at least twice a year. With time and experience, some research centres might consider conducting quarterly follow-up QI exercises, as these are shorter than the introductory QI exercises.
How do the research centres sustain the QI process? Some organizations have initiated QI only to see their efforts wane. But that can be avoided. Above all, managers must prioritize QI and involve all levels of staff in the exercise. Sponsors of HIV-prevention research must prioritize QI and provide the support necessary for research centres to conduct QI. Other issues are reviewed below. Research centre managers and staff should keep in mind that they “own” the QI process, and that these tools are theirs to use and further adapt and develop. The benefits of QI extend far beyond present research partners or sponsors. However, the research centre might want to discuss the problems identified and share the challenges and results of their QI efforts with partners and sponsors. This can enable sponsors and partners to provide more targeted support for the improvement efforts.
Communication about progress and challenges is important to keep employees involved and committed. Use regular staff meetings, call additional meetings if needed for all staff or for a department or staff members who are particularly involved, and meet with employees one-on-one as needed. If the research centre has other ways of communicating with staff, they should be used.
Action plan, monitoring and evaluation. Continuous monitoring of the action plan is important. Action plans are not useful unless they become truly important documents that guide the work done at the research centre. Action plans should be accessible to research centre staff (either posted on a wall or in a binder available for staff to consult) and should be incorporated into workplans and budgets as necessary.
Celebrate good results. Celebrate improvements at the research centre and better services for the volunteers. This enhances team spirit and motivation. Celebrations do not need to be elaborate. Small acts of appreciation usually go a long way if they are sincere and done at the right time. For example, give staff 20 minutes to get together over a cup of tea at the end of a staff meeting, or a similar activity that is feasible and that managers think their staff will appreciate.
Sample QI schedule Below is a sample timeline for conducting a QI cycle. Keep in mind that the timeline is flexible, and that this is just one way of scheduling the process.
| Activity | Week 1 | Week 2 | Weeks 3-11 | Week 12 | Week 13 | Week 14 | Weeks 15-22 | Week 24 | |-----------------------------------------------|--------|--------|------------|---------|---------|---------|-------------|---------| | Introduction meeting | | | | | | | | | | Team self-assessment | | | | | | | | | | Problem analysis & action plan meeting | | | | | | | | | | Implement interventions | | | | | | | | | | Monitoring meeting & plan use of next tool | | | | | | | | | | Volunteer feedback interview/group discussion/team self-assessment | | | | | | | | | | Problem analysis & action plan meeting | | | | | | | | | | Implement interventions | | | | | | | | | | Monitor meeting & plan use of next tool | | | | | | | | | REFERENCES AND RESOURCES
International AIDS Vaccine Initiative’s AIDS Vaccine Literacy Training Manual http://www.iavi.org/publications-resources/pages/publicationdetail.aspx?pubid=2e2d5419-050b-4814-a135-f9b0d20a5b56
EngenderHealth. 2003. COPE® Handbook: A Process for Improving Quality in Health Services, Revised Edition. EngenderHealth: New York, United States (This is a series that comes with different tools related to different areas of reproductive health, including HIV/AIDS, many of which may be relevant to research centres. The materials can be downloaded for free at http://www.engenderhealth.org/files/pubs/qi/handbook/cope_handbook-a.pdf )
EngenderHealth. 1999 and 2001. Facilitative Supervision Handbook. EngenderHealth: New York, United States. http://www.engenderhealth.org/pubs/quality/facilitative-supervision-handbook.php
For all the COPE tools and other quality-related resources, see: http://www.engenderhealth.org/pubs/quality/index.php
UNAIDS/AVAC Good Participatory Practice Guidelines (GPP). http://www.avac.org/ht/d/sp/i/304/pid/304
International Conference on Harmonization. Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice (GCP) http://ichgcp.net/LOB/media/MEDIA482.pdf
World Health Organization. Good Clinical Laboratory Practice (GCLP). http://apps.who.int/tdr/publications/tdr-research-publications/gclp-web/pdf/gclp-web.pdf
HIV Vaccine Trial Network “Participants’ Bill of Rights and Responsibilities.” http://www.hvtn.org/community/rights.html
NYU Medical Center Research Participants’ Bill of Rights. http://www.med.nyu.edu/patients-visitors/clinical-services/clinical-trial-info/participant-bill-rights
UNAIDS/WHO guidance document “Ethical Considerations in Biomedical HIV Prevention Trials”. http://data.unaids.org/pub/Manual/2007/jc1349_ethics_2_11_07_en.pdf
USAID supports many different organization and issues to improve quality. For example: www.maqweb.org http://www.infoforhealth.org/pr/q02/index.shtml http://www.infoforhealth.org/pr/q01/index.shtml http://www.prime2.org/prime2/section/53.html http://www.hciproject.org QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IN HIV-PREVENTION RESEARCH A rights-based and participatory approach
Part 2: Tools
# TABLE OF CONTENTS
Sample 1.a: Volunteer Feedback Interview: for volunteers enrolled in a clinical trial ........................................ 2\
Sample 1.b: Volunteer Feedback Interview: for volunteers enrolled in an epidemiology study .......................... 5\
Sample 1.c: Volunteer Feedback Interview: for use during recruitment and screening visits .......................... 8\
Sample 2.a: Team Self-Assessment: for use at research centre level ................................................................. 10\
Sample 2.b: Team Self-Assessment: for use at community level ........................................................................ 16\
Sample 3: Group Discussions: possible questions/topics for volunteers and community agents .................. 18 Sample 1.a Volunteer feedback interview: for volunteers enrolled in a clinical trial
**Date:** / /\
**Time:**\
**Site:**\
**Couple**\
**Indiv.**\
**Sex:** F M
**Explain:** We are conducting a survey to find out what volunteers think about our services. Your honest responses will help us improve the quality of our research services. It will take about 15-20 minutes. Your name and responses will be kept strictly confidential. If you choose not to participate, this will have no effect on the services you receive at the centre. Do you agree to participate? (Agreement is required to proceed). Thank you for your openness and time.
### Study understanding
1. How would you describe the kind of information you received before joining this study?
- Adequate [ ]
- Inadequate [ ]
In your own words, what is this study about?
### During today’s visit, did the counselor discuss the following issues with you?
2. How to reduce risks of contracting HIV
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
3. That the product under investigation may not protect you and that you need to use condoms and/or other safe sex practices
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
4. Possible side effects/benefits that may be associated with your participation in the trial
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
5. How to avoid pregnancy during the trial (when applicable)
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
6. Your right to continue or discontinue participation in the study at any time without negative consequences
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
7. Blood drawing test(s) and what each of the result(s) means for you
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
8. Concerns you may have about your visit or participation in the study
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
### Doctors or trial physicians
09. Did the doctor explain to you the purpose of each test/examination conducted today, and what each of the results might mean to you?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
10. Did you understand the doctor’s advice on health-related matters, and the purpose of each test conducted today?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
11. Did you understand the information you received from other staff members (pharmacists, laboratory personnel, etc.)?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
If no, what did you not understand? 12. The length of today’s visit was:
- Just right [ ]
- Too long [ ]
- Too short [ ]
During today’s visit, did the counselor or other staff members:
13. Offer you condoms?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
14. Offer you treatment and/or family planning options that you require?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
15. Provide you with a referral for services that you need but that are not offered at the research centre?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
How long did you wait to see the following personnel?
16. The receptionist
- \<5mins [ ]
- 5-10mins [ ]
- 10-15mins [ ]
- > 15mins [ ]
17. The nurse/counselor
- \<5mins [ ]
- 5-10mins [ ]
- 10-15mins [ ]
- > 15mins [ ]
18. The doctor
- \<5mins [ ]
- 5-10mins [ ]
- 10-15mins [ ]
- > 15mins [ ]
19. Laboratory staff
- \<5mins [ ]
- 5-10mins [ ]
- 10-15mins [ ]
- > 15mins [ ]
20. The pharmacist
- \<5mins [ ]
- 5-10mins [ ]
- 10-15mins [ ]
- > 15mins [ ]
Do you feel you were treated respectfully throughout your visit by the following:
21. Security guards?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
22. Receptionists?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
23. The nurse/counselor?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
24. The doctor?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
25. The pharmacist?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
26. Laboratory staff?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
- NA [ ]
If no, please explain:
Privacy and confidentiality
27. Do you feel you had enough privacy at every stage of your visit?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ]
If no, please explain:
28. Do you trust that you have complete confidentiality at the research centre (that only the study staff will have access to the information you provide)?
- Yes [ ]
- No [ ] If no, please explain:
| Satisfaction | |--------------| | 29. Will you return for your next visit? | Yes [ ] No [ ] Maybe [ ] | | If no or maybe, please explain: |
| 30. Will you recommend joining the study to others? | Yes [ ] No [ ] Maybe [ ] | | If no or maybe, please explain: |
| 31. Overall what do you think about the services you received today? | Very good [ ] Good [ ] Poor [ ] | | 32. What did you think of the quality of services provided by community mobilizers/workers? | Very good [ ] Good [ ] Poor [ ] |
33. If there is one improvement you would like to see at the research centre, what would it be?
Thank you very much for your time and participation!
Date administered: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ by:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Sample 1.b Volunteer feedback interview: for volunteers enrolled in an epidemiology study (not involving administration of an investigational product)
Instructions for interviewer: Interviewer should complete this questionnaire based on the volunteer’s answers. It should not be self-administered.
Explain: We are conducting a survey to find out what volunteers think about our services. Your honest responses will help us improve the quality of our research services. It will take about 15-30 minutes. Your name and responses will be kept strictly confidential. If you choose not to participate, this will have no effect on the services you receive at the centre. Do you agree to participate? (Agreement is required to proceed). Thank you for your openness and time.
PLEASE CIRCLE ONE CHOICE UNLESS INDICATED OTHERWISE
| First Visit | Made 2-4 visits | Made more than 4 visits | |-------------|-----------------|-------------------------| | 1. How long did you wait before seeing the receptionist? | | | | Less than 5 minutes | 10-15 minutes | | | 5-10 minutes | More than 15 minutes | | | Waiting time was: | | | | Just right | Too long | | | 2. How long did you wait before receiving counseling services? | | | | Less than 5 minutes | More than 30 minutes but less than 1 hr. | | | 10-30 minutes | More than 1 hour | | | Waiting time was: | | | | Just right | Too long | | | 3. Do you feel that staff at our clinic will keep the issues you discussed during your visit confidential? | | | | Yes | No | | | If no, please comment: | | | 4. Do you feel that you had enough privacy during your visit? During counseling: Yes No During physical exam: Yes No When (if) you picked up condoms: Yes No If no, please comment:
05. Do you feel that all staff members treated you respectfully throughout your visit? Yes No If no, please comment:
06. Did you find staff at the reception desk welcoming and helpful during your visit? Yes No If no, please comment:
07. Did you receive the following during the visit? PLEASE CIRCLE ITEMS RECEIVED TODAY Condoms Lubricants Referral cards (to invite others) Medications Referral to other services Other – please note:
08. Did the counselor discuss HIV-prevention options during the visit? Yes No If yes, please list which ones:
09. Is there information you would have liked to receive today that you did not receive? Yes No If yes, please explain:
10. Did you receive a schedule of follow-up visits from the counselor or other staff (if applicable)? Yes No
11. Did the counselor explain the schedule of visits properly and clearly? Yes No If no, please explain:
12. Do you think you will come back for your scheduled follow-up visits? Likely Unlikely Undecided If unlikely or undecided, please explain the reasons:
13. Will you recommend the research centre to your family members and friends? Yes No Please explain:
14. Do you have any further comments or suggestions that may help us improve our services?
Date administered: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ by:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Sample 1.c Volunteer feedback interview: for use during recruitment and screening visits
Instructions for interviewer: Interviewer will complete questionnaire based on volunteer’s answers. It should not be self-administered.
Explain: We are conducting a survey to find out what potential volunteers think about our services. Your honest responses will help us improve the quality of our research services. It will take about 15-20 minutes. Your name and responses will be kept strictly confidential. If you choose not to participate in this survey, this will have no effect on the services you receive at the centre or your participation in the study. Do you agree to participate? (Agreement is required to proceed). Thank you for your openness and time.
1. How long did your visit take today?
PLEASE CIRCLE ONE (change time if necessary)
Less than 1 hour 1 – 2 hours 2-3 hours More than 3 hours
Length of the visit: Just right Too long Too short
2. Did you find staff at the reception desk welcoming and helpful during your visit today?
Yes No
If no, please comment:
3. Do you feel that all staff members treated you respectfully throughout your visit today?
Yes No
If no, please comment:
4. How would you describe the information that you received about the study today?
Adequate Not adequate
If not adequate, please comment why:
5. In your own words, what is this study about?
6. Do you feel that the research centre gave you all the information and the time required to make an informed decision about whether to participate?
Yes No
Please explain:
7. What is your main motivation to participate/not to participate in this study/trial?
8. Do you feel that staff at our clinic will keep the issues you discussed during your visit confidential?
Yes No
If no, please comment:
9. Do you feel that you had enough privacy during your visit today?
Yes No
If no, please comment:
10. Did you receive services today that were useful to you?
Yes No
Please explain:
11. What, if anything, could the research centre do to improve its services?
Please explain:
12. Would you recommend participation in the study to family and friends?
Yes No
Date administered: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ by:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Sample 2.a Team self-assessment at the research centre level
Instructions: The team(s) responds to the questions. Circle “Y” for “yes” and “N” for “no.” A “no” answer indicates there is a possible problem.
General questions for all staff
01. Have all staff members (including security guards, drivers, cleaners and administrators) been sensitized to volunteers’ rights and responsibilities and the ethical conduct of HIV-prevention research? ......................... Y / N
02. Have all staff members (including security guards, drivers, cleaners and administrators) received instruction on the basics of HIV-prevention research? ................................................................. Y / N
03. Do we have the Volunteers’ Rights and Responsibilities posted throughout the research centre? ............ Y / N
04. Do we effectively engage community stakeholders in the design of the study/trial during implementation and after research is completed? ................................................................. Y / N
05. Are our current advisory mechanisms (community advisory boards [CABs] and other) independent and representative of the community? ................................................................. Y / N
06. Do we engage stakeholders in determining policies and practices on HIV prevention and care, non-related HIV care, and research-related harm? ................................................................. Y / N
07. Do we treat all volunteers respectfully at all times? ........................................................................ Y / N
08. Do we attend to volunteers as soon as we can and minimize waiting times? .................................. Y / N
09. Do we provide to volunteers and community members correct, clear and easy-to-understand information about the objectives of the research and the risks, benefits and process of participation? ................................................................. Y / N
10. Do we communicate our policy on research related harm to volunteers and stakeholders? ................. Y / N
11. Does our informed consent process ensure that participants have understood all that is explained to them and that their consent is genuinely voluntary? ................................................................. Y / N
12. Do we evaluate the informed consent throughout the course of the volunteer’s participation? ............ Y / N
13. Do we pilot-test our IEC materials, informed consent materials etc., before using them with volunteers? .... Y / N
14. Do we ensure that all areas of the research centre are safe and clean for volunteers and staff? ............ Y / N
15. Do we listen to volunteers and encourage them to ask questions? ................................................................. Y / N
16. Do we treat volunteers respectfully and non-judgmentally regardless of their choices, values, beliefs and practices? ........................................................................................................ Y / N
17. Do we ensure that the privacy of volunteers is adequately protected throughout their visit? ................. Y / N
18. Do we ensure that the volunteers’ personal information is kept confidential at all times? ......................... Y / N
19. Are all clinic and laboratory staff trained (including cleaning personnel and those who dispose of medical waste) in infection-prevention procedures, so that we are able to recognize the risks associated with our respective activities? ................................................................. Y / N
20. Are all clinic and laboratory staff trained in Good Clinical Practice? ................................................................. Y / N
21. Are all laboratory staff trained in Good Clinical Laboratory Practice? ................................................................. Y / N
22. Have all staff been sensitized on Good Participatory Practice? ................................................................. Y / N
23. Do we have a policy on post-HIV exposure prophylaxis (PEP) for staff in case of needle injury and for volunteers in case of rape? ................................................................. Y / N
24. Is the research centre environment friendly to both male and female volunteers, as well as to all social, cultural and demographic subgroups that may be participating in a study or trial? ......................... Y / N
25. Do we have a system to accommodate volunteers with babies/young children (if applicable)? ................. Y / N
26. Do we communicate our policies on post-trial access to trial products and procedures if applicable? .... Y / N
Receptionist/Office staff
(please add questions if needed, but don’t repeat from general section)
01. Are volunteers and visitors greeted promptly when they enter the research centre and clearly informed where and for how long they will have to wait? ................................................................. Y / N
02. Do we protect the privacy of volunteers and the confidentiality of their personal information when discussing the objective of their visit in the reception area? ................................................................. Y / N
03. Do we provide timely reimbursement for transportation? ................................................................. Y / N
04. Do we provide refreshments in a timely manner when it is appropriate to do so? ................................................................. Y / N
05. Do we always keep files and records confidential? ................................................................. Y / N
06. Are the IEC or entertainment materials (TV, videos) appropriate for the types of volunteers who visit the centre? ................................................................. Y / N
07. Do we move volunteers from service provider to service provider with maximum efficiency? ................. Y / N Counseling staff (please add questions if needed, but don’t repeat from general section)
08. Do we provide information and volunteer-centred counseling on all proven HIV-prevention options and family planning options (if applicable)? ................................................................. Y / N
09. Do we provide on-site (or refer when appropriate) all nationally approved and relevant HIV-prevention options for men and women in our study? ................................................................. Y / N
10. Do we revisit the following issues with volunteers at least once after enrollment? a. The goals and processes of the study................................................................. Y / N b. The right to informed consent........................................................................ Y / N c. The right to discontinue participation in the study at any time without negative repercussions ......................................................................................................................... Y / N d. The right to confidentiality................................................................................ Y / N e. Unknown efficacy of the product under development (when applicable)........ Y / N f. Partial effectiveness of some of the existing HIV-prevention methods (e.g. Adult Male Circumcision) ................................................................................................................................. Y / N
Do we review the following at each visit? a. What the results of each of the different clinical tests mean............................ Y / N b. HIV risk-reduction plan.................................................................................... Y / N c. New study findings or change of procedures that may have an impact on volunteers’ willingness to continue participation ................................................................. Y / N
04. Do we explain clearly why blood is being drawn for the study, the process (including safety) and what will be done with the blood sample? ................................................................. Y / N
05. Do we counsel volunteers and teach them techniques for safe disclosure of HIV status and/or research participation to partners, family and friends? ................................................................. Y / N
06. Do we explore with volunteers the possible challenges and social harms that could stem from their participation in the research or because of their HIV status, and help them identify their sources of social support? ................................................................. Y / N
07. Do we explore the needs of volunteers for family planning and provide family planning counseling on all effective and locally available methods, whether offered at the research centre or not, when appropriate? ................................................................. Y / N
08. Do we follow up on referrals made for volunteers prior to or during their next visit? ................................................................. Y / N
09. Do we have a clear system for making and following up on referrals? .......................................................... Y / N
10. Do we explore issues of adherence to research requirements (contraception, regimens and dosages, or potential disinhibition) at every visit? .......................................................... Y / N
11. Do we have sufficient time to conduct effective counseling sessions? .......................................................... Y / N
12. Do we document key counseling issues appropriately and confidentially for each volunteer to ensure effective follow-up counseling? .......................................................... Y / N
13. Do we share relevant issues and concerns of volunteers discreetly and confidentially with trial physicians? .......................................................................................................................... Y / N
14. Do we participate in any sort of supportive supervision (e.g. counseling supervision) to ensure that burnout or personal issues do not affect the quality of counseling we provide to volunteers? ........ Y / N
15. Do we have the skills and knowledge to provide effective HIV counseling and testing in the context of: a. Clinical research? .......................................................................................................................... Y / N b. Current cohort? .......................................................................................................................... Y / N
Clinical staff (please add questions if needed, but don’t repeat from general section)
01. Do we minimize waiting time for volunteers? .......................................................................................... Y / N
02. Do we review the following with each volunteer: a. The right to informed consent and confidentiality? ........................................................................... Y / N b. Concerns and clarifications needed about the study? ........................................................................ Y / N c. Family planning needs, as applicable? ............................................................................................. Y / N
03. Do we establish a good rapport with volunteers before beginning a medical examination or delivering a diagnosis? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
04. Do we listen and attend to medical complaints and provide medical services and advice in accordance with the best current medical practices? ........................................................................... Y / N
05. Do we provide medical advice and instructions on how to take medications in understandable and non-technical language? .......................................................................................... Y / N
06. Do we ask volunteers about possible concerns, encourage them to ask questions and listen carefully to what they have to say? .......................................................................................... Y / N
07. Do we provide appropriate referrals for services that we do not provide at the research centre, including: a. Family planning .................................................................................................................. Y / N b. Medical services ................................................................................................................ Y / N c. ART ........................................................................................................................................ Y / N d. Psychosocial services ........................................................................................................... Y / N
08. Do we follow up on referrals made to volunteers when they come back for the next visit? ................. Y / N
09. Do we provide research centre clinical staff with guidance on PEP and emergency contraception for volunteers who report a case of rape? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
10. Do we explore issues of adherence to research requirements (contraception, regimens and dosages, and disinhibition) during every visit? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
11. Do we have sufficient time to conduct medical examinations? .......................................................... Y / N
12. Do we have the clinical skills and knowledge to provide appropriate health services for each of the cohorts enrolled in the study? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
13. Do we always use adequate infection-prevention practices, including appropriate hand-washing and glove-changing between contacts with different volunteers? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
**Laboratory technicians/phlebotomists**
*(please add questions as needed, but don’t repeat from general section)*
01. Do we establish a rapport with volunteers prior to beginning procedures? ........................................... Y / N
02. Do we explain to the volunteers the procedure for drawing blood? ......................................................... Y / N
03. Do we make efforts to ensure volunteers feel as comfortable as possible? ............................................. Y / N
04. Are we skilled in drawing blood, and do we inflict the least discomfort possible? ................................ Y / N
05. Do we use adequate infection prevention practices, including proper hand-washing and glove-changing following contact with each volunteer? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
06. Do we have and consistently use the Laboratory Health and Safety Resource Pack? ............................ Y / N
07. Does the lab environment minimize anxiety for volunteers by storing blood and certain tools out of view? ........................................................................................................... Y / N Pharmacy staff (please add questions as needed, but don’t repeat from general section)
08. Do we have a system that minimizes volunteers’ waiting time to receive drugs? ........................................... Y / N
09. Do we consistently review instructions for taking medications with volunteers, taking care to protect their privacy? ........................................................................................................................................................................... Y / N
10. Do we maintain an appropriate stock of: a. Study drugs and products? ................................................................................................................................. Y / N b. HIV-prevention options (e.g., male and female condoms, PEP)? ................................................................. Y / N c. Lubricants (if applicable)? ................................................................................................................................. Y / N d. HIV and non-HIV related care (e.g., family planning products if applicable)? ........................................... Y / N e. Other products that are needed by volunteers? ................................................................................................. Y / N
11. Do we keep the assignment of study products and relevant documents confidential? ........................................... Y / N Sample 2.b Team self-assessment at the community level
Instructions: Outreach workers at the research centre as well as community agents use this tool to conduct team self-assessments. Circle “Y” for “yes” and “N” for “no.” A “no” answer indicates there is a possible problem.
01. Do we inform (potential) volunteers about their rights and responsibilities as volunteers? ......................... Y / N
02. Do we provide accurate and easy-to-understand information to the community to help potential volunteers assimilate information essential to their voluntary informed consent? ........................................... Y / N
03. Do we clearly explain the purpose and goal of the study? ........................................................................... Y / N
04. Do we explain to community members and volunteers that they can refuse to join or withdraw from the study at any time? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
05. Do we encourage community members and volunteers to ask questions and express their opinions? ........ Y / N
06. Do we monitor social harm and have a system in place to help volunteers if they encounter stigma or other social harm? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
07. Do we help to identify organizations and service providers where volunteers can be referred for psychosocial and other services not provided at the research centre? ................................................................. Y / N
08. Do we always ensure that (actual and potential) volunteers have privacy when we discuss sensitive issues with them? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
09. Do we always ensure the absolute confidentiality of information provided to us by research volunteers? ................................................................................................................................. Y / N
10. Do we treat volunteers and community members respectfully and non-judgmentally, regardless of their choices, values, beliefs and practices? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
11. Do we engage the community in developing effective strategies to recruit vulnerable, hard-to-reach target groups for HIV-prevention research? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
12. Are the education and recruitment materials (IEC, T-shirts etc.) appropriate for the community and target volunteers? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
13. Do we refrain from using any techniques or strategies that may be seen to create an “undue” incentive to participate? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
14. Do we have a strategy to identify the main myths and misperceptions common in the community regarding vaccine research and participation in such studies, and do we have the tools and knowledge to counter them? ........................................................................................................... Y / N
15. Do we have a standard procedure on how to help people with decisions about participation when they are concerned about stigma, violence or their spouses’ or partners’ reactions but still want to participate? ................................................................. Y / N
16. Do we review our strategies and assess the results of our efforts on a regular basis? ........................................ Y / N
17. Do we work closely with research centre staff to understand their day-to-day challenges and help them overcome those challenges through effective work in the community? ........................................ Y / N
18. Do we coordinate with other research centre staff in addressing the needs and concerns of the volunteers and follow-up appropriately as needed? ................................................................. Y / N
19. Do we conduct follow-up based on choices of volunteers/potential volunteers? ........................................ Y / N
20. Have we built strong relationships with influential individuals/community leaders who are in a position to hamper or contribute to HIV-prevention research? ........................................ Y / N
21. Have we built strong relationships with different types of community-based, faith-based, women’s, youth and other organizations to help inform the general community about HIV-prevention research and to minimize stigmatization of those who participate or are associated with the research centre? ........ Y / N
22. Do we leverage the CAB (or a similar board/committee) that represents the interests of the group(s) targeted by our research to inform our strategies for working with volunteers and identify areas for improvement? ........................................................................................................................................................................ Y / N
23. Does the CAB/committee reflect the diversity of the community? ................................................................. Y / N
24. Do we have a mechanism for collecting timely feedback on community concerns through volunteers, CAB members, peer leaders, and other community agents? ................................................................. Y / N
25. Do we regularly conduct effective community outreach and recruitment meetings and seminars? ........ Y / N
26. Do we provide regular feedback to the community about the progress, outcomes and challenges of HIV-prevention research? ........................................................................................................................................................................ Y / N Sample 3
Group discussions: Possible questions/topics for volunteers or community agents
Possible questions for group discussion with both volunteers and community agents
Instructions: First ask the numbered, closed questions below to determine what the participants think. Then explore their answers further with the open-ended probing statements bulleted at the end of this tool.
01. Do you believe volunteers receive competent counseling and sufficiently clear and correct information to provide truly informed consent?
02. Do the volunteers feel free to ask questions and express their opinions to staff at the research centre, even when it means bringing up embarrassing issues?
03. Do volunteers experience social harm due to study participation in the family/community/work place?
04. What worries community members about participation in the study?
05. Do volunteers have adequate access to relevant services at the research centre or at other facilities?
06. Are there services that the volunteers need but do not receive?
07. Does the referral mechanism work for volunteers?
08. Are volunteers pleased with the quality of care at facilities to which they are referred?
09. Do volunteers feel they have sufficient privacy when they visit the research centre?
10. Do volunteers trust that the research centre will keep their information and participation in research confidential?
11. Do volunteers think that they are treated with respect by all staff members on their visits to the research centre?
12. Is the research centre’s environment comfortable for volunteers? Can you think of ways to make the research centre more comfortable for the volunteers? Is there anything at the research centre that makes volunteers feel uncomfortable?
13. Do volunteers find any of the procedures psychologically or physically uncomfortable? Possible additional questions for use in group discussion with community agents only
Instructions: First ask the numbered questions below to determine what the community agents think. Then explore what is working and what can be improved.
01. What does the community (or what do you) know about this research study?
02. What does the community (or what do you) know about eligibility criteria and benefits and risks of participating?
03. How should we identify members of XYZ group for recruitment into this study?
04. Where is the best place to find potential volunteers for this study? What is the best time to find them?
05. How do we help members of XYZ group participate in this study?
06. How do we encourage women to participate in this study?
07. How do we encourage men to participate in this study?
08. What are the reasons many community members give for being unsure about participating in HIV-prevention research?
09. How can we work more closely together to encourage community members to participate in HIV-prevention research? What can you do to help encourage community members to participate?
10. What are some of the reasons there is stigma surrounding HIV-prevention research in this community?
11. How can we work together to reduce the stigma surrounding HIV-prevention research? What can you do personally to help reduce stigma?
12. What can we do to ensure the safety of those who participate in HIV-prevention research, particularly in terms of negative reaction or violence by a partner or the community? What can you personally do to help ensure the safety of those who participate in HIV-prevention research?
13. What are we doing well, and what can we do better? Possible additional questions for use in group discussion with volunteers only
14. What benefits have you experienced from participating in HIV-prevention research?
15. What are the challenges/disadvantages of participating in HIV-prevention research?
16. What can the research centre (or community workers) do to make it easier for volunteers to participate in this study?
17. What do you or other volunteers think of the services received at the research centre (or the services obtained through referrals?)
18. Did you or other volunteers receive the services needed? If not, what services are needed that were not received?
19. What can the research centre (or community workers) do to better serve you?
20. What is your opinion of the counseling you receive at the research centre? Does the counseling help you to practice safer sex? If not, what can we do to make the counseling more useful? What, besides counseling, would encourage you to practice safer sex?
21. What can we do to recruit more volunteers from your community into this study?
Probing Statements
Verbal probes improve the accuracy of information obtained through interview. The following are examples of probing statements the facilitator may use to keep the discussion going:
- Tell me some more about that
- What can you tell me about that?
- Please explain further
- Please, give me an example of a situation when... QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IN HIV-PREVENTION RESEARCH A rights-based and participatory approach
Part 3: Facilitator’s Guide
# TABLE OF CONTENTS
| Section | Page | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|------| | Objectives | 2 | | How to conduct QI introductory sessions | 3 | | Sample agendas | 5 | | Research centre staff: three-day agenda | 5 | | Research centre staff: two-day agenda | 6 | | Research centre staff: one-day agenda (for management team) | 7 | | Community agents: one-day agenda | 8 | | Quality improvement introductory sessions | 9 | | Section I: Introducing QI: Setting the stage | 9 | | Session 1: Climate setting: expectations, objectives, group norms | 9 | | Session 2: Concept and perception of quality in HIV-prevention research | 10 | | Session 3: Rights and responsibilities framework | 12 | | Session 4: Concepts and process of QI and requirements for establishing a QI program | 14 | | Session 5: Ensuring a conducive environment for QI at the research centre | 15 | | Section II: Identifying an area to be improved/problem to be solved | 17 | | Session 6: Identifying an area to be improved: Introduction of QI tools | 17 | | Session 7: Developing a research centre-specific volunteer feedback interview | 18 | | Session 8: Using feedback interviews | 19 | | Session 9: Using team self-assessment at the research centre level | 21 | | Session 10: Using team self-assessment at the community level | 22 | | Session 11: Using group discussion at the research centre level | 23 | | Session 12: Using group discussion at the community level | 24 | | Section III: Analyzing an area to be improved | 26 | | Session 13: Analyzing an area to be improved or a problem to be solved for research centre staff | 26 | | Session 14: Analyzing an area to be improved or a problem to be solved with community agents | 27 | | Section IV: Developing an action plan and monitoring and evaluation | 28 | | Session 15: Developing an action plan with research centre staff | 28 | | Session 16: Developing an action plan with community agents | 30 | | Session 17: Monitoring and evaluation of QI | 31 | | Session 18: Developing research centre-specific standards of quality and quality indicators | 32 | | Session 19: Planning for implementation of QI at the research centre | 33 | This Quality Improvement Facilitator’s Guide is designed to help navigate effective introduction of Quality Improvement (QI) at the research centre and in the community. This guide includes a series of QI introductory sessions that convey, using a participatory approach, key concepts and guidelines in the QI manual. These include the concept of quality, the four-step QI process, and how to use the tools in the context of HIV-prevention research and within the framework of volunteers’ rights and responsibilities. Use of this guide demands substantial understanding of the concepts and information in the Quality Improvement Manual.
Objectives
When used to support the introduction of QI at the research centre, this guide can help ensure that research centre staff:
- Are familiar with the framework of quality in HIV-prevention research based on the rights and responsibilities of volunteers
- Are familiar with the QI tools to be used at both the research centre level and the community level
- Know how to adapt and use the QI tools
- Develop skills in identifying quality problems, analyzing their root cause(s) and developing action plans to solve problems or prevent their recurrence
- Recognize issues related to effective implementation and sustainability of QI programs
When used to support the introduction of QI at the community level, this guide can help to ensure that community agents:
- Are aware of quality issues pertaining to community mobilization, education and recruitment within the framework of volunteer rights and responsibilities
- Are familiar with expected standards of quality and recognize that research centres are committed to improving the quality of community outreach activities
- Are aware of their role in improving the quality of services in HIV-prevention research
- Develop skills in identifying problems, analyzing causes and developing action plans to solve or prevent identified problems from recurring
- Are familiar with the research centre’s QI plan and feedback mechanisms How to conduct QI introductory sessions
Each of the 19 QI introductory sessions includes the topic, approximate time it takes to conduct the session, learning objectives, materials required and the content. The content is broken down into easily followed steps, which may include different options to suit different audiences.
QI sessions should be tailored to the characteristics, cohorts and protocols at each research centre. When designing and preparing QI sessions, the following should be considered:
Facilitator(s) Select QI facilitators based on their core competencies and expertise. Facilitators must have experience in participatory facilitation and a thorough understanding of all concepts in the Quality Improvement Manual. A research centre can work with an external QI facilitator when first implementing QI, and/or appoint staff members as QI facilitators if s/he has sufficient experience in implementing QI (See Manual, page 13).
Criteria for facilitator selection:
- Experience in participatory facilitation
- Understanding of the QI process
- Demonstrated commitment to QI
- Well respected by both management and staff
- Good communication and listening skills
- Sufficient influence at the research centre to implement changes
The QI introductory sessions can involve one or more facilitators, depending on the experience, skills and expertise of each. When an external facilitator has experience with QI but lacks experience working in a research context, an internal staff member with experience in HIV-prevention research should co-facilitate.
Target participants Introductory sessions should involve all research centre staff members. This helps to facilitate and mainstream effective QI implementation. When all staff members cannot be called to such sessions at once, multiple introductory sessions may be scheduled. In such cases, ensure that each session has representatives from different departments or sections of the research centre to ensure adequate exploration of quality issues in the continuum of the research process and to aid group dynamics.
Venue QI introductory sessions, especially those that identify areas for improvement, should be conducted at or near the research centre, so that relevant QI tools are applied within the specific context of the research centre and the surrounding community. In such cases, the QI facilitator and management need to ensure that the sessions do not disrupt research-related activities and that the rights and privacy of the volunteers are protected.
Training methodology and tips This facilitator’s guide is designed to promote the involvement of staff and community agents and maximize their ownership and implementation of QI. The guide outlines suggested approaches and plans for each session topic; however, the experience and approach of the facilitator should be taken into account in designing the sessions. Key tips are provided for facilitators throughout the introductory sessions. The facilitator is guided to encourage staff to initiate problem identification and problem solving, and to avoid lecturing them or handing out solutions. The facilitator must remain neutral to ensure that the QI process is staff-led. Finally, although the agenda and sessions should be planned in advance, facilitators should be flexible and willing to adapt to group needs and dynamics. The session evaluations and closing should be designed by the facilitator with reference to the agenda and approach used (for example, 2-3 successive days or 3 separate days). Logistics, resources and preparation Prior to presenting the introductory sessions, facilitators should identify participants and ensure an optimal group size (ideally 12 to 16 staff members per session), locate a convenient venue with sufficient space to conduct the sessions, provide an agenda to participants, arrange for refreshments, design the venue space layout to enable group learning and prepare handouts and other materials. Materials required for each session are listed in session descriptions.
Suggested agendas This facilitator’s guide is devised to be adapted by each facilitator to meet the needs of various participants (e.g. research centre staff or community agents) as well as the time and resources available for the QI introductory sessions. The following agendas are suggested:
Three-day agenda for research centre staff Three days (not necessarily successive) are required to effectively introduce QI at the research centre and to conduct all sessions in this facilitator’s guide. The first day focuses on introduction of QI and tools for problem identification. The second focuses on analysis of identified problems. The third focuses on action plan development and implementation.
Two-day agenda for research centre staff A two-day version of the agenda for introducing QI is provided as an option for research centres that have limited time available.
One-day agenda for management A one-day agenda for introducing QI to research centre management is also provided, but this does not preclude management participation in two- or three-day introductory sessions scheduled for all staff.
One-day agenda for community agents One full day is required to introduce QI at the community level. While the approach at the research centre is on the integration of QI into its processes, the approach at the community level emphasizes the incremental introduction of QI and application of QI tools (a choice of group discussion or team self-assessment) to identify problems, analyze root causes and develop action plans. Different tools should be introduced at different meetings with community agents.
## RESEARCH CENTRE STAFF: THREE-DAY AGENDA
### Day 1: Introduction to quality improvement and quality improvement tools
| TIME | TOPIC | SESSION # | |------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------| | 8:30am – 10:30am | Climate Setting: expectations, objectives, group norms | Session 1 | | | Concept and perception of quality in HIV-prevention research | Session 2 | | 10:30am – 11:00am| Tea Break | | | 11:00am – 1:00pm | Rights and responsibilities framework | Session 3, option 1| | | Concepts and process of QI and requirements for establishing a QI program | Session 4 | | 1:00pm – 2:00pm | Lunch | | | 2:00pm – 4:00pm | Identifying an area to be improved: introduction of QI tools | Session 6 | | | Developing a research centre-specific feedback interview | Session 7 | | 4:00pm – 4:30pm | Closing | | | 4:30pm – 5:00pm | Afternoon Tea | |
### Day 2: Development of research centre-specific tools and experimenting with the tools
| TIME | TOPIC | SESSION # | |------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------| | 8:30am – 10:30am | Recap | | | | Using feedback interviews | Session 8 | | | Analyzing an area to be improved identified through feedback interview| Session 13 | | 10:30am – 11:00am| Tea Break | | | 11:00am – 1:00pm | Using team self-assessment tools at the research centre level | Session 9 | | 1:00pm – 2:00pm | Lunch | | | 2:00pm – 3:00pm | Using team self-assessment tools at the research centre level (cont’d)| Session 9 (cont’d) | | 3:00pm – 4:30pm | Analyzing an area to be improved identified through team self-assessment | Session 13 | | 4:30pm – 5:00pm | Afternoon Tea | |
### Day 3: Data analysis, interpretation, and development of action plan
| TIME | TOPIC | SESSION # | |--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | 8:30am – 10:30am | Recap | | | | Using group discussion | Session 11| | | Developing research centre-specific standards of quality and quality indicators | Session 18| | 10:30am – 11:00am | Tea Break | | | 11:00am – 1:00pm | Developing an action plan | Session 15, option 1| | | Monitoring and Evaluation of QI | Session 17| | 1:00pm – 2:00pm | Lunch | | | 2:00pm – 3:30pm | Ensuring a conducive environment for QI at the research centre | Session 5, option 2| | | Planning for implementation of QI at the research centre | Session 19| | 3:30pm – 4:30pm | Evaluation and closing | | | 4:30pm – 5:00pm | Afternoon tea | |
### RESEARCH CENTRE STAFF: TWO-DAY AGENDA
#### Day 1: Introduction to quality improvement and quality improvement tools
| TIME | TOPIC | SESSION # | |--------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | 8:30am – 9:45am | Climate Setting: expectations, objectives, group norms | Session 1 | | | Concept and perception of quality in HIV-prevention research | Session 2 | | 9:45am – 10:30am | Rights and responsibilities framework | Session 3, option 1| | | Concepts and process of QI and requirements for establishing a QI program | Session 4 | | 10:30am – 11:00am | Tea Break | | | 11:00am – 1:00pm | Identifying an area to be improved: team self-assessment and feedback interviews | Session 6 | | | Using feedback interview | Session 8 | | 1:00pm – 2:00pm | Lunch | | | 2:00pm – 4:15pm | Analyzing an area to be improved identified through feedback interview | Session 13| | | Using team self-assessment tools | Session 9 | | 4:15pm – 4:30pm | Closing | | | 4:30pm – 5:00pm | Afternoon Tea | | Day 2: Development of research centre-specific tools, experimenting with the tools, and action plan development
| TIME | TOPIC | SESSION # | |------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | 8:30am – 9:00am | Recap | | | 9:00am – 10:30am | Analyzing an area to be improved identified through team self-assessment | Session 13| | 10:30am – 11:00am| Tea Break | | | 11:00am – 11:30am| Analyzing an area to be improved identified through team self-assessment (cont’d) | Session 13 (cont’d) | | 11:30am – 1:00pm | Developing research centre-specific standards of quality and quality indicators | Session 18| | 1:00pm – 2:00pm | Lunch | | | 2:00pm – 3:00pm | Developing action plan | Session 15, option 1| | 3:00pm – 4:00pm | Planning for implementation of QI at the research centre | Session 19| | 4:00pm – 4:30pm | Evaluation and closing | | | 4:30pm – 5:00pm | Afternoon Tea | |
RESEARCH CENTRE STAFF: ONE-DAY AGENDA (FOR MANAGEMENT TEAM)
| TIME | TOPIC | SESSION # | |------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------| | 8:30am – 9:00am | Climate Setting: expectations, objectives, group norms | Session 1 | | 9:00am – 9:45am | Concept and perception of quality in HIV-prevention research | Session 2 | | 9:45am – 10:30am | Rights and responsibilities framework | Session 3, option 2| | | Concepts and process of QI and requirements for establishing a QI program | Session 4 | | 10:30am – 11:00am| Tea Break | | | 11:00am – 12:00pm| Identifying an area to be improved: introduction to QI tools | Session 6 | | 12:00pm – 1:00pm | Analyzing areas to be improved | Session 13| | 1:00pm – 2:00pm | Lunch | | | 2:00pm – 3:00pm | Developing research centre-specific standards of quality and quality indicators | Session 18| | | Developing an action plan | Session 15, option 2| | 3:00pm – 4:00pm | Ensuring a conducive environment for QI at the research centre | Session 5, option 1| | 4:00pm – 4:30pm | Evaluation and closing | | | 4:30pm – 5:00pm | Afternoon Tea | |
## COMMUNITY AGENTS: ONE-DAY AGENDA
| TIME | TOPIC | SESSION # | |------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------| | 8:30am – 9:00am | Climate Setting: expectations, objectives, group norms | Session 1 | | 9:00am – 9:45am | Concept and perception of quality in HIV-prevention research and in the community | Session 2 | | 9:45am – 10:30am | Rights and responsibilities framework | Session 3, option 3 | | 10:30am – 11:00am| Tea Break | | | 11:00am – 1:00pm | Identifying an area to be improved: using team self-assessment or group discussion at the community level | Session 10 or 12 | | 1:00pm – 2:00pm | Lunch | | | 2:00pm – 3:00pm | Analyzing areas to be improved | Session 14 | | 3:00pm – 4:00pm | Developing action plan | Session 16 | | 4:00pm – 4:30pm | Evaluation and closing | | | 4:30pm – 5:00pm | Afternoon Tea | | QUALITY IMPROVEMENT INTRODUCTORY SESSIONS
Note: the following sessions are not meant to be read in succession. Please follow the suggested agendas on the previous pages and refer to the corresponding session number listed on the agenda.
SECTION I: INTRODUCING QI: SETTING THE STAGE
Session 1 Climate Setting: expectations, objectives, group norms
Climate setting is done differently depending on the affiliation of the facilitator (external or staff member), the size of the research centre (large or small number of staff), the type of agenda and approach (e.g. three successive days, or two- or three-day agendas facilitated over multiple days) and the type of audience (research centre managers, research centre staff, or community agents). For instance, an internal facilitator might already know the names and roles of each participant and might therefore require less time for participant introductions, whereas an external facilitator might need to use this time to establish roles in addition to obtaining the names of participants as part of the introduction. In general, a flexible approach is recommended. But it is always necessary to establish group expectations, objectives and norms.
Time: 30 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To introduce the agenda and participants
- To gain insight into participants’ perceptions of the concept of quality improvement and their expectations for the session
- To present objectives of the QI introductory sessions, and expected outcomes
- To establish an environment conducive to discussing quality-related issues, basic teamwork and adult learning principles
Advance preparation/materials:
- Visuals: #1 or #2, Objectives of Introductory Sessions
- Handouts: #1, #2 or #3 Agenda (based on target audience)
Content: STEP ONE Welcome participants, introduce facilitators and ask participants to introduce themselves (participants provide their name and role/title).
STEP TWO (5 – 10 minutes) Option 1 (recommended for three- and two-day agendas): In groups of two or three, have participants discuss three expectations for the QI introductory sessions and write them down on paper. Option 2 (recommended for one-day agendas for managers): Ask each participant to write what they understand “quality improvement” to mean and what they expect to achieve/contribute by the end of the day.
Option 3 (recommended for one-day agendas for community agents): Prompt discussion by asking what came to mind when they were invited to attend the meeting on quality in community outreach activities. What were the expectations?
STEP THREE (10 – 15 minutes) Present the introductory QI session objectives (Visual #1 or #2) and agenda (Handout #1, #2 or #3), and ask for reactions (e.g. overlap between objectives and expectations mentioned above, consensus on timing of lunch and breaks, etc.). Briefly describe some of the quality-related activities the research centre is already involved in, including the results (if applicable) and the added value of QI.
STEP FOUR (5 – 10 minutes) Option 1 (recommended for three- and two-day agendas): Briefly state that discussing quality-related work issues requires open and honest discussion about the research centre, their own work, and that of their colleagues. Ask the group (you may choose to organize participants in groups of two or three, or conduct a plenary discussion based on the number of participants, your judgment of group dynamics and the time you have available) to come up with norms or principles that will foster a conducive environment for learning and discussing ways to improve our work. If not mentioned, emphasize confidentiality and the need to respect opinions and views as part of group norms, and their value for the QI process. Also stress that Quality Improvement is not about blaming individuals or teams for mistakes or problems, or pointing fingers at others, but rather identifying areas that need to be improved and collectively making improvements.
Option 2 (recommended for one-day agenda for community agents): Briefly emphasize the principles that will guide the community agents’ relationship and collaboration with the research centre. Explain that you want to ensure a safe environment to raise problems, challenges and identify solutions related to community outreach and recruitment, community education and the quality of services at the research centre. Emphasize that their honest opinions are of utmost importance. Finally, ask them to devise rules that will ensure honest discussion during the meeting.
Session 2 Concept and perception of quality in HIV-prevention research
Time: 45-60 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To gain insights on the term “quality”
- To define quality in HIV-prevention research
- To introduce the framework of quality in HIV-prevention research Advance preparation/materials: Visuals: #3 Key messages on quality, #4 Definitions of Quality, #5 Definition of Quality in HIV-prevention Research
Content:
STEP ONE Have participants think of a time when they have experienced either very good or very bad quality services. A large group may want to break into smaller groups for this exercise. Encourage them to think of personal experiences outside the research centre, for example, in a restaurant, hair salon, taxi or hospital. Ask them to share their experiences with one another for about 5 minutes.
STEP TWO Bring the group together and ask three or four people to share the situations described in their discussions.
STEP THREE Ask the whole group the following questions:
- How did you know that you were provided with bad or good services? Write (or ask a co-facilitator for help) responses to this question on a flip chart.
- How did you respond to each experience? Write down responses on a flip chart with two columns indicating “Outcomes of good services” and “Outcomes of bad services.”
STEP FOUR Conclude by remarking, or in your own words, “Just like us, most volunteers have expectations about the quality of services they are provided. They will also take actions similar to those just discussed, depending on whether they are satisfied or dissatisfied with our services.”
STEP FIVE Brainstorm the following: Option 1: For community agents:
- How do quality problems in our community work affect work at the research centre?
Option 2: Management and research centre staff
- How do quality problems at the research centre affect work in the community (i.e. community outreach, recruitment, etc.)?
STEP SIX Ask the group to define “quality.” Acknowledge their answers and then provide the brief definition of “quality” based on Visual #4 Definition of Quality.
Show Visual #3 and reiterate the key messages on quality.
Show Visual #4 with suggested definition of quality.
STEP SEVEN Ask if anyone can define “quality of HIV-prevention research” based on above definitions of quality. Acknowledge their answers and then move to Visual # 5 on definition of “quality of HIV-prevention research” and ask for their reactions to the definition. Session 3 Rights and responsibilities framework
Time: 30-60 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To build understanding of quality based on rights, responsibilities and ethics in HIV-prevention research
- To discuss rights and responsibilities as they pertain to each staff member, station, department or the research centre in general
- To discuss ways to solidify commitment to upholding rights and responsibilities in HIV prevention
Advance preparation/materials: Handout: #4 Volunteer Rights and Responsibilities
Content: Option 1 (60 minutes) (recommended for two- or three-day agendas with research centre staff):
STEP ONE Explain that before discussing QI in depth, it is important to look at the research centre’s research processes within the context of the rights and responsibilities framework based on international and national guidelines, the core of QI (see Manual, page 4).
Divide the participants according to their professional roles (e.g. community outreach workers, administrative staff including drivers, security, receptionists, and cleaners, nurse counselors/counselors, phlebotomists/laboratory technicians, trial physicians and pharmacists). With a smaller group you may divide them into two categories: clinical staff and non-clinical staff.
STEP TWO Ask each professional group or individual (in some cases, you might only have one person representing a profession) to come up with a brief description of their roles and responsibilities vis-à-vis volunteers and record it on one flip chart, and of volunteers’ rights vis-à-vis their roles, which should be recorded on a second flip chart. For example, the receptionist/s might indicate the following:
Receptionist roles & responsibilities
- Make volunteers feel welcome
- Ensure volunteers’ confidentiality during the intake process
- Etc.
Volunteers’ rights vis-à-vis the role of the receptionist
- Right to respectful treatment and to feel as comfortable as possible
- Right to privacy and confidentiality
- Etc. STEP THREE Each group presents what it discussed and the key roles and responsibilities of its sub-groups. Encourage groups to present in order of their interactions with volunteers. Encourage members of other groups to react to the presentations by asking questions, or providing additional insights about rights and responsibilities.
Display the flip charts on the wall to reflect research processes and volunteers’ experience from first interaction (e.g. community level) to the last.
STEP FOUR Probe participants about their opinions of how well the research centre has protected volunteers’ rights and its compliance with ethical responsibilities mentioned on the flip charts.
Provide Handout #4 on volunteers’ rights and responsibilities and discuss with the group whether there is any right that was not mentioned, or what they think of the responsibilities of volunteers.
Briefly discuss, with reference to the definition of quality, how they feel volunteers would rate the research centre in complying with volunteers’ rights and helping volunteers fulfill their responsibilities.
Option 2 (30 minutes) (for the management team):
STEP ONE Brainstorm the elements of volunteers’ rights in HIV-prevention research with the group and record their responses on a flip chart.
STEP TWO Provide Handout #4 on rights and responsibilities of volunteers and record how the group feels about them.
STEP THREE Have the group identify all strategies that the research centre has put in place to ensure that the rights mentioned above are protected and that it complies with its responsibilities in that regard.
Probe to find out what problems participants have identified and what solutions they have put in place to solve those problems and/or ensure that they do not recur.
Probe to find out whether any of their strategies included a systematic exploration of volunteers’ perceptions, as discussed earlier in the section covering the definition of quality.
Probe to discover whether staff members have been involved in monitoring compliance and providing solutions to problems.
Option 3 (45 minutes) (for community agents):
STEP ONE Divide the group in two to answer the following questions:
- Group 1: What are the Do’s and Don’ts when recruiting volunteers or conducting community outreach for HIV-prevention research?
- Group 2: What are the rights of volunteers when participating in HIV-prevention research?
STEP TWO Ask each group to present its answers and ask other members of the group for comments, questions and additions. Provide your own additions and clarifications only after the rest of the group has reacted.
STEP THREE Conclude by telling participants that the research centre has introduced a process to continuously monitor the quality of services both at the research centre level and at the community level. This approach is based on identifying quality problems and solving them together as a team. Encourage participants to keep in mind the Do’s and Don’ts and volunteers’ rights for the remainder of the workshop. Session 4 Concepts and process of QI and requirements for establishing a QI program
Time: 30-60 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To define QI
- To introduce the QI process
- To discuss benefits and challenges of QI implementation
Advance preparation/materials: Visuals: #6 Definition of Quality Improvement in HIV-prevention Research, #7 The Quality Improvement Process
Content: STEP ONE Ask if anyone can try to define the term “quality improvement” based on what was defined as “quality in HIV-prevention research.”
STEP TWO Review Visuals #6 and #7.
Emphasize:
- That QI is a systematic, planned and continuous process
- The difference between the approaches at the research centre level and at the community level (see Manual, page 16)
- That the introductory meeting is part of the recommended steps in preparing a research centre for implementing QI effectively (see Manual, page 13)
Ask if there are questions, comments, additions or concerns.
Steps three and four below are recommended for three-day agenda only.
STEP THREE Divide the participants into two groups:
- Group 1 - Discuss the potential benefits of implementing QI programs.
- Group 2 - Discuss the anticipated challenges to implementing QI programs (if a research centre has started implementing QI but has experienced challenges, this session could also focus on those challenges). STEP FOUR Ask each group to present and solicit comments and questions from other groups. Then brainstorm with the group about potential benefits and potential solutions to challenges.
STEP FIVE Let the group know that the rest of this program is going to focus on the first three steps of the QI process by applying select QI tools to identify a problem, analyze a problem and develop an action plan to correct the problem and to prevent it from happening again. The fourth step of the QI process, implementing an action plan, will take place after the QI introduction is completed. It will, however, be discussed as part of the broader process of implementation of QI at the research centre.
Session 5 Ensuring a conducive environment for QI at the research centre
Time: 45-60 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To discuss ways to ensure that research centres create a conducive environment for QI
Advance preparation/materials: Handout: #16 Creating an Environment Conducive to Good Employee Performance and Quality Services
Content: Option 1: Recommended for managers:
STEP ONE Provide Handout #16 on creating a conducive environment and ask each participant to mark what might be easy to implement and what might be challenging to implement.
STEP TWO Facilitate discussion by asking participants to share with the group what would be easy to implement (or what the research centre management has been doing effectively), then ask participants to discuss what would be challenging. Ask the group to brainstorm potential solutions to the challenges.
Encourage each manager to identify issues they can work on in order to create an environment conducive to QI.
STEP THREE Conclude by stating that both management and staff have the responsibility to create an environment conducive to QI. Emphasize that implementation of QI may involve changes to management or supervision approaches and how staff interact with their colleagues and supervisors. Emphasize that this requires incremental change and that it has been a learning process for most managers when they adapt QI approaches. Option 2: Recommended for three-day agenda
STEP ONE Divide the group into three smaller groups with mixed representation.
STEP TWO Assign each group a specific stakeholder listed below and ask each group to answer the question: What should this stakeholder do to facilitate effective implementation of QI?
- Staff (vis-à-vis volunteers, community agents, other staff and management)
- Management (vis-à-vis staff, other managers, community agents, volunteers and donors)
- Donors/Sponsors (vis-à-vis the management of the research centre)
STEP THREE Ask each group to present its answers and request additional comments or questions from the other groups.
STEP FOUR Ask what can be done to ensure that the above stakeholders adhere to the suggested recommendations in Step two.
STEP FIVE Conclude by stating that ensuring an environment conducive to sustaining QI programmes requires a team effort by many stakeholders. While donors can play a role in encouraging QI, it is mostly the responsibility of management and staff—the individuals conducting HIV-prevention research. State that effective implementation of QI requires a change in management’s approach and a change in how staff relate to volunteers, community agents and colleagues. Finally, it is important to acknowledge the need to change approaches and to do so incrementally. Session 6 Identifying an area to be improved: Introduction of QI tools
Time: 90-120 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To introduce a variety of QI tools
- To explore advantages of specific tools and approaches in an HIV-prevention research setting
- To differentiate between volunteer-oriented and service provider-oriented tools
- To provide a basis for research centres to choose tools appropriate to their contexts
- To explore the interdependence of QI tools at the research centre level and the community level
Advance preparation/materials:
- Visuals: #8 Methods and Tools to Identify a Problem and #9 Tools in Three Columns
- Handouts: #6 Suggested Tools at the Research Centre Level and Community Level and #7-11 Tools: Definitions, Advantages and Disadvantages (for distribution at end of session)
Content: STEP ONE On a sheet of paper, write down each of the following methods to identify a quality problem (listed on Visual #8) and put them on a table facing down: Rumors, Checklist, Household questionnaire, Suggestion box, Volunteer/Client feedback, Supervision, On-the-job observation, Feedback interviews, Analysis of routine data, Self-assessment (team and individual), Mystery (dummy)-volunteer, Records review, Case studies and role-plays, and Group discussion.
STEP TWO Ask each participant to pick one method and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of the method as a way to identify a quality problem. Encourage additional discussion from the group.
STEP THREE On a flipchart, make three columns—“volunteer-oriented” in the left column, “service provider-oriented” in the right column, and “both” in the middle column (see visual #9). Ask the group to classify tools as either volunteer-oriented or service provider-oriented (i.e. tools that provide volunteer perspectives and those that collect the perspectives of service providers). Ask the group to put those that they think can do both in the middle. STEP FOUR Ask the group to prioritize two or three methods to be applied at their research centre. Allow debate, but ensure that it remains focused on the practicality of each method for the research centre (in terms of data collection and data analysis, integrity of data collection, volunteers’ vs. service providers’ perspectives, action plan development, etc.).
Acknowledge the value of other methods but mention that for the purpose of these QI introductory sessions, the focus will be on the ones presented in the QI Toolkit. Additional methods can be added by the research centres as needed.
STEP FIVE Provide Handout #6 on Suggested Tools at the Research Centre Level and Community Level. Reemphasize the connection between quality at the research centre level and quality at the community level (see Manual, page 16). Provide the rationale for use of each tool at each level. Ask if there is any tool discussed that they feel needs to be added in Handout #6.
STEP SIX Conclude by saying that the subsequent sessions will focus on tools recommended in Handout #6. It is recommended that the research centre experiment with the tools and prioritize the ones that will help identify quality problems from the perspectives of both service providers and volunteers. Due to the interdependence of quality at the research centre level and the community level, it is recommended that problems be identified at both levels. Some QI tools can be used to complement other QI tools (e.g., group discussion can complement feedback interview). It is recommended that research centres use different tools from one QI exercise to another to maintain interest of QI participants and to explore different perspectives.
Distribute Handouts #7-11 on Tools: Definitions, Advantages and Disadvantages.
Session 7 Developing a research centre-specific volunteer feedback interview
For three-day agenda only
Time: 60 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To familiarize participants with the feedback interview approach
- To adapt the QI tools to the particular research centre and its environment
- To discuss modalities for the effective implementation of feedback interviews
Advance preparation/materials: Handouts: #18, #19 and #20 Samples of Volunteer Feedback Interviews Content:
STEP ONE Explain that there are three sample feedback interviews suggested in the toolkit: one for volunteers enrolled in clinical trials, one for volunteers enrolled in an epidemiology study, and another for use during recruitment and screening visits. Briefly explain that these are very general samples and not all questions will apply to all research centres. Each will need to adapt these tools to suit its context and cohorts.
STEP TWO Divide the group into two. (Note: If the research centre is conducting both clinical trials and epidemiology studies at the same time, consider dividing the group into three: one looking at the feedback interview for a clinical trial, another considering the feedback interview for an epidemiology study and another examining the feedback interview during recruitment).
Provide Group 1 with the sample feedback interview for use during clinical trials or epidemiology studies, depending on the current focus of the research centre. Provide Group 2 with the sample feedback interview for use during recruitment or screening visits. Ensure that all staff roles are represented in each group, if possible.
STEP THREE Ask each group to consider which questions apply to its research centre and which ones do not, and why. Ask them to suggest additional questions that may be crucial in helping the research centre identify a quality problem. Recommend that they keep written notes about their suggestions because the outcome of this discussion will form the basis for adapting the tools. Encourage one person in each group to take notes on the suggested changes to the sample feedback interview. Collect these notes at the conclusion of Step three.
STEP FOUR Ask each group to present the outcome of its discussion to the entire group. Document all suggested modifications and incorporate changes into a feedback interview tool adapted for the research centre prior to Session eight.
Session 8 Using feedback interviews
Time: 60 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To practice using feedback interviews and familiarize participants with the experience of being an interviewer
- To practice entering data from volunteer feedback interviews
Advance preparation/materials:
- Visuals: #10 Instructions on How to Apply Volunteer Feedback Interviews Handouts: Adapted sample of Volunteer Feedback Interview (see outcome of Session seven) and Handout #17 Sample Excel Spreadsheet for Volunteer Feedback Interview Data Analysis.
Setting up a role-play Prepare two desks and chairs (depending on group size, see Step two) arranged at each corner of the room with laptops equipped with the sample Excel data-collection spreadsheet. As an alternative to using the laptops, split the participants into two groups to discuss the feedback interviews.
Content:
STEP ONE Provide a brief overview presentation (Visual #10) on how to use feedback interviews (see Manual, page 21).
STEP TWO Instruct the group to break up in pairs for a role-play exercise in which one person will act as the interviewer and one will act as the volunteer.
STEP THREE Decide which type of feedback interview to use, depending on the type of study conducted by the research centre (see outcome of Session seven). If the research centre is conducting a clinical trial or epidemiology study, then use the adapted feedback interview. If it is in the middle of recruitment or is otherwise preparing for a study or trial, then use the adapted feedback interview for recruitment and screening. Provide each interviewer with one questionnaire to use during the interview.
STEP FOUR Ask the participants playing the role of volunteers to answer the questions as if they are volunteers or potential volunteers at the research centre. Remind them to assume that they have gone through all the steps of their scheduled visit, and that this interview is happening at its very end. Instruct them to answer some questions positively and some negatively for the purpose of analyzing the data in the following steps.
STEP FIVE At the end of the role-play, collect all filled feedback interview forms. Discuss their experience conducting interviews or being interviewed. Divide the whole group in two. Send each group to one laptop or computer that has the Excel file for feedback interview data input downloaded.
Briefly explain how to insert the data into the Excel sheet. Explain that the Excel sheet is set to match the answers in the volunteers’ feedback interview with option one as the most desirable quality outcome and option four as the least desirable quality outcome. State that the Excel sheet will automatically calculate a summary of percentages after data from the volunteer feedback interview has been entered. Provide Handout #17 as a sample of an Excel data collection sheet filled out. As an alternative to using Excel, participants can calculate the answers manually.
STEP SIX Ask each group to summarize its findings based on the excel sheet summary or hand calculations, and to highlight problems. If time allows, the groups can make graphs and presentations (using software such as PowerPoint) out of their findings. Ask each group to try to define the quality problem(s).
STEP SEVEN Conclude by thanking participants for doing the role-play and data entry. State that the data is going to be used to analyze the root cause of the problem. Session 9 Using team self-assessment at the research centre level
Time: 90-120 minutes
Learning objectives
- To familiarize staff with the team self-assessment approach
- To practice using the sample self-assessment tools
- To adapt sample tool questions to the particular context of the research centre
Advance preparation/materials:
- Visuals: #11 Instruction on How to Apply Team Self-Assessment at the Research Centre Level
- Handout: #21 Sample Team Self-Assessment for Use at Research Centre Level
Content: Ideally, this exercise should be conducted at the research centre. If that is not possible (e.g. the venue where you are holding the QI introductory sessions is too far from the research centre) set up the room to reflect the different stations at the research centre. The latter approach deprives participants of the advantage of actual research centre observation during this process. To compensate for that disadvantage and get the most out of this exercise, encourage them to think of the research centre environment as they go through this exercise or to repeat it when they get back to the research centre.
STEP ONE Provide an overview on how to apply team self-assessment at the research centre level (see Manual, page 17). Explain that the whole team will go through a series of questions related to the quality of their work. A “no” answer means the team needs to discuss how to improve that area. Remind the group of the importance of providing honest feedback and that there will be no penalty for identifying a problem. (The goal is not to assign blame to individuals but to identify processes that can be improved).
STEP TWO Divide the group into QI teams based on the number and composition of the participants (see Manual, page 18).
STEP THREE Explain that each QI team will have a section (or multiple sections) of the team self-assessment tool to focus on and a station (or multiple stations) to visit. A research centre staff member should remain at each station representing their professional role to answer additional questions that QI teams might have. STEP FOUR Briefly go through the role of research centre staff at each station, as well as the role of QI teams. Ask participants to mark any question that is not relevant to the context of the research centre with an “N/A” for not applicable.
STEP FIVE Ask the QI team to imagine that they are volunteers (emphasize that they must identify as the specific cohort enrolled at the research centre) going from station to station and completing the questions on the assigned section of the self-assessment tool by interacting with staff at the station. In addition, the QI team should make observations of quality-related issues at each station (e.g. crowded reception area, cleanliness, display of volunteers’ rights, privacy, etc.) and use that information and their own knowledge to help answer the questions on the team self-assessment tool. If the research centre is small, and the QI team is comprised of all staff members, at least one relevant staff member should be present at each station (e.g. at least one counselor should be at the counseling station) to respond to any questions that the QI team might have. Then they can rejoin the QI team when they move on to the next station.
STEP SIX Option 1: At the end of the exercise, bring the group together and ask staff to discuss how it felt to be in the volunteers’ shoes.
Walk through the questions with the whole group. Congratulate the teams for all questions answered “yes” and emphasize that each indicates an area where the research centre is doing quality work. List all questions answered “no” on a flipchart, all questions on which the group could not reach consensus, and any additional problem areas identified through the interactions with the research centre staff at the station.
Option 2: Provide Handout #21 team self-assessment to all staff members and ask each staff member to answer individually. Then have the group compare answers with each other and discuss.
Session 10 Using team self-assessment at the community level
Time: 120 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To use team self-assessment with community agents to identify areas to be improved at the community level
- To familiarize community agents with expected standards for community outreach and recruitment
Advance preparation/materials: Handout: #22 Sample Team Self-Assessment at the Community Level Content:
**STEP ONE** Explain that the whole team will go through a series of questions related to the quality of our work. A “no” answer means the team needs to discuss how to improve that area. Remind the group to give honest feedback and that there will be no penalty for identifying a problem. (The goal is not to point fingers at individuals, but to identify processes that can be improved).
**STEP TWO** Depending on the group size and composition, you may divide the group into small teams to go through the questionnaire (see Manual, page 20).
**STEP THREE** Encourage community agents to imagine that they are in the shoes of community members or volunteers when responding to questions.
**STEP FOUR** Analyze the answers to questions by highlighting what the team is doing well (questions answered “yes”) and by identifying quality problems (questions answered “no”). Inform the group that the focus will be on questions answered “no” in the following session on group discussion (Session 12).
______________________________________________________________________
**Session 11**
**Using group discussion at the research centre level**
**Time:** 75 minutes
**Learning objectives:**
- To familiarize staff with the group discussion approach
- To practice group discussion
- To adapt the sample group discussion tool to the particular research centre
**Advance preparation/materials:**
- Visuals: #12: Guide to Conducting a Group Discussion
- Handout: #23 Sample Group Discussion Questions
**Content:**
**STEP ONE** Give an overview of group discussion as a tool for identifying quality problems (see Manual, page 23). Then briefly present the approach to conducting a group discussion (Visual #12) and solicit questions and comments. STEP TWO Ask for two volunteers to lead group discussions, and ask each volunteer discussion leader to choose a note taker to document the discussion. Split the rest of the group into two and have them play the role of research volunteers in the group discussion. Responses should genuinely reflect their feelings about the issues raised by the questions. If the group is small, you may choose to have only one group discussion instead of conducting two simultaneously.
STEP THREE Give the two discussion leaders the sample group discussion handout and have them choose which questions to use, focusing on those that apply to the research centre. Facilitators may focus on questions related to the issues emerging from volunteer feedback interviews or the elements of the team self-assessment that need clarification. Discussion leaders should also identify a main facilitator and note taker. Give them 15 to 20 minutes to prepare.
STEP FOUR (45 min) Ask the group discussion facilitator to start the group discussion. S/he might skip the introduction section during the role-playing to save time.
STEP FIVE Ask each group about its experience during the group discussion in identifying areas that need to be improved.
STEP SIX Ask the note taker to present the key findings with a focus on major problems identified.
Session 12 Using group discussion at the community level
Time: 120 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To use group discussion to identify areas to be improved at the community level.
- To familiarize community agents with expected quality standards for conducting community outreach and recruitment.
Advance preparation/materials: Review how to conduct a focus group discussion with community agents (see Manual, page 23).
Content: STEP ONE Tell the participants that we will have an open discussion on the quality of our work so that we can learn how to do our work better.
STEP TWO Briefly discuss rules to ensure effective and honest discussion. Emphasize the importance of confidentiality and respect for the opinions of others. STEP THREE Start the discussion selecting questions from the Group Discussion tool three that pertain to the issues identified on the team self-assessment exercise (Session 10). Given time constraints, it is strongly preferable to cover fewer discussion questions on major quality issues than to rush through many questions. Include follow-up issues identified at the research centre or through other QI exercises.
STEP FOUR Thank the participants for their answers. Present a summary of the discussion and answers to the group. Inform the group that the next session will look at the problems that were identified and determine the causes so that a decision can be made on how to prevent or solve the problems (Session 14). Session 13 Analyzing an area to be improved or a problem to be solved for research centre staff
Time: 60-90 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To establish the process for analyzing area(s) to be improved or problem(s) to be solved
- To familiarize participants with root-cause analysis
Advance preparation/materials: Visuals: #13 Formulation of Problem Statement and Multiple Whys
Content: STEP ONE With a brief presentation, introduce the concept of multiple whys (Visual #13 and Manual, page 26).
STEP TWO Choose one of the two following options:
Option 1 (recommended for managers): provide Handout #13, “Sample of Quality Discovery Problems,” and ask each participant, or pairs of participants, to apply multiple whys to identify the root cause of the problem. While these are case studies, encourage managers to think of the cases as if they happened at the research centre.
Option 2 (recommended for two- and three-day agendas): Note: This session is implemented based on the tool used to identify the problem. For example, if you introduced the team self-assessment and you had participants practice using it, then you should apply the multiple whys to the data from the team self-assessment.
Select key findings (two to three) from practice with feedback interviews, self-assessments, or group discussions. Include a minimum of two volunteer-oriented discoveries and two service provider-oriented discoveries. Divide the group accordingly and ask each small group to apply multiple whys to different identified problems that need to be improved.
STEP THREE Ask each group to present its analysis of the root cause. Ask other groups to respond with alternative explanations or confirm the root-cause analysis.
STEP FOUR Thank the group and discuss how it felt to conduct the root-cause analysis.
When participants have applied root-cause analysis of the volunteer feedback interview, team self-assessment or group discussion, discuss the difference between conducting root-cause analysis for a volunteer-oriented tool (e.g. volunteer feedback interview) and service provider-oriented tool (e.g. team self-assessment).
**STEP FIVE** Conclude by saying that once problems have been identified, prioritized, and their root cause(s) have been analyzed (both those that are within the control of research centre and those that are not) through multiple whys, the next step is to discuss how to solve or prevent the identified problems by developing an action plan, which is covered in Session 15.
______________________________________________________________________
**Session 14**
**Analyzing an area to be improved or a problem to be solved with community agents**
**Time:** 60 minutes
**Learning objectives:**
- To analyze identified area(s) to be improved or problem(s) to be solved with community agents
- To familiarize community agents with root-cause analysis
**Advance preparation/materials:** Review formulation of problem statements and multiple whys (Manual, page 26).
**Content:**
**STEP ONE** Review the summary of key quality problems identified through team-self assessment or group discussion. Ask participants to identify the two most pressing problems that need to be solved to better serve volunteers. Explore the rationale for their choices.
**STEP TWO** Tell participants that we will try to better understand the cause of this problem in order to fix it. To do that you will ask them a couple of questions, starting with why. Inform them that the process of asking multiple whys might feel a bit intrusive but that it is necessary to understand the causes of problems before solving them or preventing them from happening again. Start with problem #1 and ask up to three why questions, obtaining consensus from the group on answers to each. Write them on a flip chart or ask the note taker to document the answers. Then facilitate the same discussion for problem #2.
**STEP THREE** Ask participants how they felt about the “why” question-and-answer session. Thank participants for their insights and honesty.
**STEP FOUR** Conclude by saying that now that we have a sense of what the causes of the quality problems might be, the next step is to discuss how to solve or prevent the identified problems by developing an action plan. Session 15 Developing an action plan with research centre staff
Time: 60 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To familiarize participants with the process of developing an action plan
- To practice the development of research centre-specific action plans
- To initiate action plan development for identified quality problems
Advance preparation/materials:
- Visuals: #14: Considerations and Preparations for Action Plan Meeting
- Handouts: #14: Sample Action Plan 1 and #15 Sample Action Plan 2
Content: Option 1 (recommended for two- and three-day agendas for research centre staff and one-day agendas for management teams):
STEP ONE Review the third step of the QI process, the development of an action plan to solve and prevent identified quality problems. Preparing an action plan involves the development and selection of interventions. State that the goal is to develop the intervention that is most effective in solving the identified problems within available resources. If there are many problems, it may be necessary to prioritize the interventions and set a realistic timeline.
STEP TWO State that there are different ways of developing action plans. However, in principle, all QI action plans must include the following:
- Date the problem was identified
- Problem identified
- Root-cause analysis
- Proposed intervention
- Individual/s responsible for implementation
- Implementation timeframe
- Intervention outcomes Provide samples of action plans (Handouts #14 and #15) and allocate 15 minutes for the whole group to review and critique them.
**STEP THREE** Divide the group into two and provide each with at least two of the problems identified (one through feedback interview and another through team self-assessment) and its root-cause analysis from Session 13. Ask each group to come up with a proposed intervention.
Groups should focus on the following:
- How effective will the proposed intervention be?
- How does this intervention prevent this problem from recurring?
- Does the research centre have resources to implement the suggested intervention?
**STEP FOUR** Ask each group to present its proposed intervention. Then give the other group the opportunity to respond to the presentation, answering the following questions:
- Will the proposed intervention(s) solve the identified problem or prevent it from recurring?
- Are there better alternatives? What are they, and why are they better?
**STEP FIVE** Conclude by saying that most interventions require considerable consultation with relevant staff throughout their design and development. It is therefore crucial to include them in action plan development. When those affected by a problem are involved, the solution ultimately chosen is more likely to be appropriate. Different teams might sometimes have different perspectives on the best course of action regarding suggested interventions. Similarly, the QI committee and management team may have differing opinions on suggested interventions. It might be necessary to rethink an intervention due to its cost or other considerations. It is therefore important not to rush the process of intervention design. It is recommended that the QI committee and management hold a specific meeting to develop interventions and action plans.
**Option 2** (Recommended for research centre managers):
**STEP ONE** Based on the outcomes of Session 13 and root-cause analysis of the sample discovery quality problem, provide each participant with one discovery problem and ask each to come up with an action plan to solve the problem and/or prevent it from recurring.
**STEP TWO** Ask each participant to present his or her finding, and ask other participants to react to the presentation by considering the three questions below:
- Would the proposed intervention(s) solve the identified problem or prevent it from recurring?
- Does the research centre have resources to implement the intervention?
- Are there better alternatives? What are they and why are they better?
**STEP THREE** Conclude by saying that most interventions require considerable consultation with relevant staff throughout their design and development. It is therefore crucial to include them in action plan development. When those affected by a problem are involved, the solution ultimately chosen is more likely to be appropriate. Different teams might sometimes have different perspectives on the best course of action regarding suggested interventions. It is important that management and QI committee consult each other during action plan development and implementation of action plans. Session 16 Developing action plan with community agents
Time: 60 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To familiarize participants with the process of developing an action plan
- To practice the development of research centre-specific action plans
- To initiate action plan development for identified quality problems
Advance preparation/materials:
- Choose a sample action plan (Manual, pages 29-30).
Content:
STEP ONE State quality problem #1 and the root causes identified by the group. Then ask the group: what can be done to solve this problem or ensure that this problem does not recur?
Probe with the following queries:
- What can the team do better? Who can take the lead on this action?
- What can different individuals do? How can we ensure that they do it?
- What can the research centre do? How can we ensure that it follows through?
STEP TWO Write down different interventions and specific suggestions for persons responsible.
STEP THREE Repeat Steps one and two for quality problem #2. If time allows, develop action plans for up to three or four quality problems.
STEP FOUR Conclude by thanking participants and highlighting next steps (for example, presenting the outcome of this discussion to the QI committee), taking care to inform them whether you are going to give feedback to this particular group, to a larger group or give no feedback. If you will provide feedback, explain how you are going to disseminate the feedback (next community meeting, communication board, etc). Session 17 Monitoring and evaluation of QI
Time: 60 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To establish a framework for monitoring and evaluating QI
- To initiate discussion on roles and terms of the QI committee
- To organize a QI committee
Advance preparation/materials: Handouts: #5 Role of QI Committee and Consideration for Creating a QI Committee
Content: Recommended for three-day agendas for research centre staff only.
STEP ONE Review the four steps in the QI process, the systematic approach to QI and the need for continuous monitoring and evaluation.
STEP TWO Ask participants what they think “monitoring and evaluation of QI” entails. Write down their answers on a flip chart. Provide additional input based on page 31 of the QI Manual.
Ask participants who they think should be in charge of monitoring and evaluation of QI.
STEP THREE Introduce the concept of a QI committee. Provide Handout #5 on the role of the QI committee and considerations for establishing a QI committee.
STEP FOUR Ask participants to select a QI committee for ensuring the launch and effective implementation of QI. The group can decide if they want to elect members or solicit volunteers. Session 18 Developing research centre-specific standards of quality and quality indicators
Time: 60 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To discuss the need for monitoring key indicators of quality
- To explore key indicators of quality and to discuss their meaning and relevance to the research centre
- To discuss adaptation of indicators
Advance preparation/materials: Handouts: Handout #12 Sample of Quality Indicators
Content:
STEP ONE Brainstorm with the whole group how to measure quality improvement from one QI exercise to another. Briefly, state that depending on the tools used and problems identified, a research centre might have many quality issues to monitor. However, not all identified problems require monitoring over time, and not all problems will be recurrent. Furthermore, there are other indicators of quality that are not necessarily captured by the QI tools. It is therefore important for the research centre to identify key indicators of quality to monitor over time as they conduct different QI exercises.
STEP TWO Distribute Handout #12 on sample quality indicators. Divide the group in two. Group 1 will look at measurable indicators that can be collected through QI tools, and Group 2 will consider measurable indicators that can be collected through existing research centre forms and data. Ask the groups to evaluate each indicator and decide whether it is a relevant indicator of quality for the specific research centre, and whether the indicator should be monitored over time. Encourage the group to explore and identify other relevant measurable indicators for quality.
STEP THREE Ask each group to present its thoughts on the sample quality indicators. Presentations should encourage consensus and discussion among groups. Document the different groups’ suggestions to form a cumulative list of initial measurable indicators to observe over time.
STEP FOUR Conclude by saying that these indicators may need to be revised from time to time based on experience and observations through the continuation of the QI process. The QI committee should ensure appropriate monitoring of such indicators and review them using cause analysis in different QI exercises. State that this is important so that the research centre does not get caught in a measurement trap (see Manual, page 31). Session 19 Planning for implementation of QI at the research centre
For two- and three-day agendas only
Time: 60 minutes
Learning objectives:
- To formulate a specific plan to implement the QI process at the research centre after the introductory sessions
- To discuss a way forward on quality problems identified during the introductory sessions
Advance preparation/materials: Review “Tool selection and adaptation” (see Manual, page 17).
Content: STEP ONE Ask the QI committee to facilitate discussions and present a consensus on the following issues:
- How to proceed with problems identified and action plans developed during the QI introductory sessions
- Which tool(s) to use and how to proceed with use or adaptation of the tool(s) for identification of other areas to be improved
- A date/time when staff will use the tool(s)
- Whether to start with QI at the research centre level first, begin with the community level, or conduct both simultaneously
- How to approach the management regarding the four issues above if they were not part of the QI introductory sessions QUALITY IMPROVEMENT IN HIV-PREVENTION RESEARCH TOOLKIT
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4923-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 95,
"total-input-tokens": 188963,
"total-output-tokens": 50048,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
136,
1
],
[
136,
2527,
2
],
[
2527,
6745,
3
],
[
6745,
8983,
4
],
[
8983,
8983,
5
],
[
8983,
13659,
6
],
[
13659,
18123,
7
],
[
18123,
21289,
8
],
[
21289,
25881,
9
],
[
25881,
31022,
10
],
[
31022,
34971,
11
],
[
34971,
37880,
12
],
[
37880,
41002,
13
],
[
41002,
44481,
14
],
[
44481,
46210,
15
],
[
46210,
48080,
16
],
[
48080,
51451,
17
],
[
51451,
54689,
18
],
[
54689,
58590,
19
],
[
58590,
61894,
20
],
[
61894,
65644,
21
],
[
65644,
69641,
22
],
[
69641,
74249,
23
],
[
74249,
78716,
24
],
[
78716,
80793,
25
],
[
80793,
85202,
26
],
[
85202,
89530,
27
],
[
89530,
94330,
28
],
[
94330,
97825,
29
],
[
97825,
98956,
30
],
[
98956,
102741,
31
],
[
102741,
106481,
32
],
[
106481,
107965,
33
],
[
107965,
111880,
34
],
[
111880,
114130,
35
],
[
114130,
117041,
36
],
[
117041,
119856,
37
],
[
119856,
124535,
38
],
[
124535,
126604,
39
],
[
126604,
126708,
40
],
[
126708,
127493,
41
],
[
127493,
129885,
42
],
[
129885,
131768,
43
],
[
131768,
132535,
44
],
[
132535,
134076,
45
],
[
134076,
134841,
46
],
[
134841,
135657,
47
],
[
135657,
137089,
48
],
[
137089,
137954,
49
],
[
137954,
141006,
50
],
[
141006,
143951,
51
],
[
143951,
147111,
52
],
[
147111,
150276,
53
],
[
150276,
153476,
54
],
[
153476,
154939,
55
],
[
154939,
158343,
56
],
[
158343,
161033,
57
],
[
161033,
162878,
58
],
[
162878,
164575,
59
],
[
164575,
165971,
60
],
[
165971,
166089,
61
],
[
166089,
168913,
62
],
[
168913,
170943,
63
],
[
170943,
174489,
64
],
[
174489,
176614,
65
],
[
176614,
179439,
66
],
[
179439,
182554,
67
],
[
182554,
185631,
68
],
[
185631,
187171,
69
],
[
187171,
189309,
70
],
[
189309,
191985,
71
],
[
191985,
194201,
72
],
[
194201,
196197,
73
],
[
196197,
199251,
74
],
[
199251,
200612,
75
],
[
200612,
202704,
76
],
[
202704,
204050,
77
],
[
204050,
205985,
78
],
[
205985,
208248,
79
],
[
208248,
210543,
80
],
[
210543,
213618,
81
],
[
213618,
215713,
82
],
[
215713,
218061,
83
],
[
218061,
219749,
84
],
[
219749,
221806,
85
],
[
221806,
222532,
86
],
[
222532,
224539,
87
],
[
224539,
226742,
88
],
[
226742,
228173,
89
],
[
228173,
231333,
90
],
[
231333,
232831,
91
],
[
232831,
234011,
92
],
[
234011,
236329,
93
],
[
236329,
237413,
94
],
[
237413,
237467,
95
]
]
} |
f396824384919be15ea2e840af82803ae3952e7c | Quality and Methodology Information
General details
Title of output: House Price Index Abbreviated title: HPI Designation: Official Statistics not designated as National Statistics Geographic coverage: UK, Country and Region Contact details: hpi@ons.gsi.gov.uk.
Executive summary
The Office for National Statistics (ONS) House Price Index (HPI)(^1), previously published by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG)(^2), is a monthly release that publishes figures for mix-adjusted average house prices and house price indices for the UK, its component countries and regions. The index is calculated using mortgage financed transactions that are collected via the Regulated Mortgage Survey by the Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML)(^3). These cover the majority of mortgage lenders in the UK. The HPI complements other measures of inflation published by ONS such as the Consumer Price Index, the Producer Price Index and the Services Producer Price Indices.
The ONS HPI statistical bulletin(^1) provides comprehensive information on the change in house prices on a monthly and annual basis. It also includes analysis by country, region, type of buyer (first-time buyers and former owner-occupiers) and type of dwelling (new dwelling or pre-owned dwelling).
The ONS HPI was developed to produce a consistent series of traded house prices. Until its transfer to ONS in April 2012, the index was produced and published by the DCLG. One of its main features is the mix-adjustment of the monthly transactions to remove the effect of changing composition of sold stock. Since its introduction, the index relies on the use of mortgage transaction data, which provide good coverage of the housing market but excludes those properties that are cash sales.
In December 2010, the National Statistician’s Review of House Price Statistics(^4) made a series of recommendations. These were mainly driven by the availability of numerous official house price statistics, which vary in their sample, methods and focus. The main recommendation was for the development of a definitive official statistic.
The importance of this index is reflected in the development of a European regulation(^5), introduced in February 2013, which is the first stage in the introduction of owner occupiers’ housing costs into the Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices. The regulation identifies house price indices as ‘important indicators in their own right’ reflecting the consequences for an economy of unstable or unsustainable house price development.
This document contains the following sections:
- Output quality;
- About the output;
- How the output is created;
- Validation and quality assurance;
- Coherence and comparability;
- Concepts and definitions;
- Other information, relating to quality trade-offs and user needs; and
- Sources for further information or advice. Output quality
This document provides a range of information that describes the quality of the data and details any points that should be noted when using the output.
ONS has developed Guidelines for Measuring Statistical Quality; these are based upon the five European Statistical System (ESS) Quality Dimensions. This document addresses these quality dimensions and other important quality characteristics, which are:
- Relevance;
- Timeliness and punctuality;
- Coherence and comparability;
- Accuracy;
- Output quality trade-offs;
- Assessment of user needs and perceptions; and
- Accessibility and clarity.
More information is provided about these quality dimensions in the sections below.
About the output
Relevance (The degree to which statistical outputs meet users’ needs.)
The ONS HPI provides a monthly estimate of the price of current property relative to its price in February 2002.
The mix-adjusted HPI series started in 1969, when the index was calculated from a 5% sample of the mortgage transactions of a number of building societies. From 1993, the coverage of transactions increased from building societies to cover all mortgage lenders. In 2002, the index started using hedonic regression to perform the mix-adjustment. In 2003, the sample submitted by each mortgage lender was expanded from 5% to cover all their recorded mortgage transactions. These mortgages transactions are collected from the Regulated Mortgage Survey of the CML.
The production of house price statistics is relevant for a large number of purposes. Users of official housing market statistics range from central government, local government and devolved administrations through to financial institutions, housing associations, investors, businesses (including estate agents and house builders), academics and households. They use housing market statistics to make a wide variety of decisions including provision of housing, whether to buy, and whether to lend. Details of the main users and their uses of housing market statistics are given below.
Summary of the main users of House Price Statistics
| Users | Uses | |------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------| | Central Government | Central government has three key uses for housing market statistics: | | | • monitoring economic performance; | | | • policy making and monitoring; and | | | • regulation. | | Local Government | Local authorities require housing market statistics: | | | • to monitor and develop their housing policies to meet the current | | | and future needs of their areas; and | | | • to understand how changes and policies at the national level affect | | | housing at the local authority level. | | Devolved administrations | Devolved administrations require housing market statistics for: | | | • supporting policy making and monitoring changes at the country | | | specific level similar to those requirements of central government; | | | and | | | • secondly, they use it for comparison to wider UK policies and | | | economy. | | Banks and building societies | Housing market statistics are used for mortgage lending in order to | | | make decisions on whether to lend, how much to lend, and setting | | | interest rates. | | House builders | House builders are interested in whether and where demand for new | | | housing exists; and the returns received on homes built or converted. | Estate agents & letting agencies
- Estate agents are interested in the numbers of properties being sold and the price for which they are sold; as well as the types of properties and their location. They need to be able to advise potential sellers on the achievable selling price of their property but also require statistics in running their business.
- Letting agencies are interested in similar characteristics to estate agents but require the numbers of properties being rented and the rent values which they achieve. Although some national estate agents exist, most are based at the local or regional level.
Housing associations
Housing associations are primarily interested in numbers of people in housing need together with statistics on the housing market which helps them to decide whether to purchase or build property to meet that need. Values of private and social housing rents will also influence their decisions, as this will affect the social housing they can provide.
Further information on the uses of HPI can be found in the National Statistician’s Review of Official Housing Market Statistics.
Timeliness and punctuality
(Timeliness refers to the lapse of time between publication and the period to which the data refer. Punctuality refers to the gap between planned and actual publication dates.)
The ONS HPI follows a monthly publication schedule and is lagged by two months. This lag is mainly due to the time it takes to collect the mortgage data from banks and building societies across the UK.
The time of publication of the HPI depends on the data delivery from the Council of Mortgage Lenders, hence the HPI statistical bulletin is published either on the second or third Tuesday of the second month after the reference period.
For more details on related releases, the UK National Statistics Publication Hub is available online and provides 12 months’ advance notice of release dates. In the unlikely event of a change to the pre-announced release schedule, public attention will be drawn to the change and the reasons for the change will be explained fully at the same time, as set out in the Code of Practice for Official Statistics.
How the output is created
Data sources
Since October 2005, the ONS HPI (formerly the DCLG HPI) has been based on a sample of mortgage completions data from the Regulated Mortgage Survey as collected by the CML.
The number of transactions received from the RMS is affected by the total number of mortgages completed for house purchase in any period. During 2011, the sample covered 65-70% of all UK mortgage completions.
Price methodology
Full details of the methodology used to calculate the ONS HPI can be found in the Official house price statistics explained article. The ONS HPI is mix-adjusted to allow for differences between houses sold (for example type, number of rooms and location) in different months within a year. House prices are modelled using a combination of characteristics to produce a model containing around 100,000 cells (one such cell could be first-time buyer, old dwelling, one bedroom flat purchased in London). Each month, estimated prices for all cells are produced by the model and then combined with their appropriate weight to produce mix-adjusted average prices. The index values are based on growth rates in the mix-adjusted average house prices and are annually chain-linked. More information on the model used is available via the hedonic model methodology paper published on the HPI User Guidance webpage.
Re-weighting
The ONS HPI is a weighted Laspeyres-type index. In January of each year, the index weights are updated based on the relative numbers of transactions during the previous three years, which are weighted to total transactions obtained from Land Registry. Applying new weights ensures that the index keeps up to date with changes in the types of properties that are being purchased, and therefore reflects the price of the average property.
One consequence of changing the weights every year is that the mix-adjusted house prices cannot be compared between years as the weights are different. The index itself is constructed on a chain-linked basis, which enables year-on-year comparisons to be made. This means that the year-on-year change in the index for June 2011, say, is effectively the change in the average price from June to January 2011 (using the weights for 2010) combined with the change in the average price from January to June 2011 (using the weights for 2011). Therefore, the year-on-year change in the index is not the same as the year-on-year change in the mix-adjusted average price. More information on the HPI methodology is available on the DCLG Website.
Seasonal adjustment
The housing market shows seasonal effects that affect house prices. For example, prices have tended to be higher during the summer months than during the winter months. These seasonal effects are estimated and adjusted for in order to calculate month-on-month price changes. Seasonally adjusted figures are provided at a national level in Table 7 alongside the unadjusted figures of the other tables. Seasonal adjustment is performed each month and reviewed each year, using the GSS recommended software X-12-ARIMA. Seasonally adjusted house price estimates are used to report monthly percentage changes. All other figures such as annual rates of change and average house prices are based on unadjusted estimates, unless otherwise stated.
Statistical disclosure
Statistical Disclosure Control methodology is applied to HPI data. This ensures that information attributable to an individual organisation is not disclosed in any publication. The Code of Practice for Official Statistics set out practices for how ONS protects data from being disclosed. The principle includes a guarantee to survey respondents to ‘ensure that official statistics do not reveal the identity of an individual or organisation, or any private information relating to them’. More information can be found on the Statistical Disclosure Control page of the ONS website.
Summary of the HPI
| What it measures | It provides comprehensive information on the change in house prices on a monthly and annual basis. It also includes analysis by country, region, type of buyer (first-time buyers and former owner-occupiers) and type of dwelling (new dwelling or pre-owned dwelling). | |------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Frequency | Monthly. | | Period available | The mix-adjusted HPI series start in 1969 (on a quarterly basis) and from February 2002 on a monthly basis. | | Data sources | Since October 2005 the ONS HPI (formerly the DCLG HPI) has been based on a sample of mortgage completions data from the Regulated Mortgage Survey as collected by the Council of Mortgage Lenders. | | Methodology | The ONS HPI is mix-adjusted to allow for differences between houses sold in different months within a year. House prices are modelled using the hedonic model. Movements in these modelled house prices are chain-linked together to produce a consistent price index. | | Coverage | The sample covers all the recorded mortgage transactions from the Regulated Mortgage Survey of the Council of Mortgage Lenders. This sample represents approximately 67% of all mortgage transactions in a given period. | | Re-weighting | The ONS HPI is a weighted Laspeyres-type index. In January of each year the index weights are updated based on the relative numbers of transactions during the previous three years, which are weighted to total transactions obtained from Land Registry. | | Seasonal adjustment | The housing market shows seasonal effects that affect house prices. These seasonal effects are estimated and adjusted for in order to calculate month-on-month price changes. Seasonally adjusted house price estimates are used to report monthly percentage changes. | | Publication schedule | The ONS HPI follows a monthly publication schedule and is lagged by two months. | Validation and quality assurance
Accuracy (The degree of closeness between an estimate and the true value.)
Estimates from the HPI are subject to various sources of error. The total error consists of two elements, the sampling error and the non-sampling error.
Sampling error
This occurs because estimates are based on a sample rather than a census; the precision is usually estimated through the calculation of standard errors.
Standard errors are not currently calculated for HPI, although the production of standard errors is being investigated for future publication.
Non-sampling error
Non-sampling errors are not easy to quantify and include errors of coverage, measurement processing and non-response.
Various procedures are in place to ensure that errors are minimised:
- validation checks on data, based on extreme values within a cell are conducted to highlight potential unusual prices. The combination of each property size and region forms a cell for which an average price is collected;
- data cleaning is done to remove cases with missing data and erroneous data;
- the minimum and maximum values for house price, mortgage advance and total income are investigated and if they are deemed to be suspect, they are removed from the dataset;
- the top and bottom 10 house price outliers are validated against external sources; and
- ratio analysis (comparing house price to total income and mortgage advance to total income) is then carried out to check for consistency.
Another aspect of quality is reliability. Assessing the difference between the first published estimate and the final revised figure provides an indication of reliability.
House Price Index revisions policy, which is aligned with the Code of Practice, is to show significant revisions, but to suppress minor changes to avoid unnecessary inconvenience to users. In all cases, the revised figures are labelled with an ‘R’ and the reason for the revision explained under the ‘New this month’ section of the background notes.
- At the end of every quarter, as well as releasing final figures for the latest month, ONS revises the figures from the previous two months. This is done because some mortgage lenders, which account for 1 to 2% of all records, provide their data on a quarterly rather than monthly basis.
- Additionally, data will be revised for the previous month if more than 1,000 additional cases are received in a subsequent month.
In July 2012 the methodology used to seasonally adjust the HPI was updated following a review, and brings the HPI in line with ONS best practice for seasonal adjustment. Seasonal factors are now estimated on a monthly basis and therefore may result in small revisions to the previous 12 months data. This updated process improves the accuracy of the seasonally adjusted figures. Other revisions to historical data (other than those currently due for revision) will be made only if the revision is substantial.
The National Statistics website contains information on the HPI revisions policy.
Coherence and comparability
(Coherence is the degree to which data that are derived from different sources or methods, but refer to the same topic, are similar. Comparability is the degree to which data can be compared over time and domain for example, geographic level.)
Currently, there are a number of different sources of house price statistics published in addition to the ONS HPI. There will be differences in the data published by each source, as there are differences in both the data and methodology used. Therefore, the ONS HPI is not directly comparable with these other indicators. Further details on the differences between official house price statistics can be found in the article Official House Price Statistics Explained. Land Registry House Price Index
All residential property transactions in England and Wales are recorded by Land Registry. These transactions are used for calculating the Land Registry index. This index is based on repeat-sales regression, which calculates the change in price of any property transacted twice since 1995. Therefore, new build properties are excluded from the index. Land Registry publishes indices at a sub-regional level. The Land Registry HPI is normally published on the 20th working day of every month, and refers to all transactions of the preceding month. The Land Registry HPI can be accessed via the Land Registry's website.
Registers of Scotland Official Quarterly Housing Market Statistics
Registers of Scotland record all the property transactions in Scotland. It produces average house prices based on arithmetic means of these transactions, which is published as the Registers of Scotland Official Quarterly Housing Market Statistics in the second month after the month to which the figures refer to.
Northern Ireland Residential Property Price Index
The Land & Property Services assisted by the Northern Ireland Statistics & Research Agency (NISRA) publish a quarterly Residential Property Prices Index (RPPI) for Northern Ireland. The index measures change in the price of residential property sales recorded by Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs. This is a new official statistic, first published in quarter one of 2012.
Halifax House Price Index and Nationwide House Price Index
Both Halifax and Nationwide produce house price indices based on their own mortgage approvals only and therefore, like the ONS HPI, will not include any cash transactions. They both have UK-wide coverage, and since the Halifax and Nationwide use only their own in-house data they can process them immediately and do not have to await the receipt of data from other lenders. This means that they are timelier than the ONS HPI.
LSL Acadata House Price Index
The LSL Acadata House Price Index (formerly LSL Property Services/Acadametrics HPI) is the only house price index to reflect all transactions, as opposed to data samples, and provides mix and seasonally adjusted results at national, regional and county/unitary district/London borough levels. The index can be accessed at LSL Acad HPI.
In addition, other indices are also produced. Rightmove tracks the asking prices of properties on its website and the Royal Institute of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) produces an opinion survey of its surveyors regarding the direction that prices are moving in.
Full details on the alternative house price statistics can be accessed via the National Statistician's Review of House Price Statistics.
Concepts and definitions
(Concepts and definitions describe the legislation governing the output and a description of the classifications used in the output.)
The importance of this index is reflected in the development of a European regulation, introduced in February 2013, which is the first stage in the introduction of owner occupiers’ housing costs into the Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices. The regulation identifies house price indices as ‘important indicators in their own right’, reflecting the consequences for an economy of unstable or unsustainable house price development. The European regulation also requires state members to provide quarterly house price indices.
Details on the official house price statistics can be found in the article Official house price statistics explained.
Furthermore, DCLG provides a list of definitions of general housing terms. Other information Output quality trade-offs (Trade-offs are the extent to which different dimensions of quality are balanced against each other.)
A trade-off of accuracy over timeliness is made to produce the monthly HPI. The collection of mortgage transaction data from a range of different lenders across the UK takes time and therefore delays the timely publication of the ONS HPI.
Although the availability of accurate and timely house price statistics is desirable, there are a number of obstacles to their production. These are mainly due to the nature of housing compared with other goods. Further details on these issues can be found in the article Official house price statistics explained.
Assessment of user needs and perceptions (The processes for finding out about users and uses, and their views on the statistical products.)
As stated previously, there are a number of key uses and users of the HPI. There are also a number of mechanisms via which users are able to provide views on the HPI: • public feedback/consultation are sought when methodological improvements are made to the HPI; and • suggestions and comments are sought from the public in each publication and via Twitter and Facebook.
A dedicated HPI email address is provided for users to provide feedback: hpi@ons.gsi.gov.uk The Housing Statistics Network is used to canvass opinion and feedback from users to help improve the ONS HPI.
Sources for further information or advice Accessibility and clarity (Accessibility is the ease with which users are able to access the data, also reflecting the format in which the data are available and the availability of supporting information. Clarity refers to the quality and sufficiency of the release details, illustrations and accompanying advice.)
ONS recommended format for accessible content is a combination of HTML web pages for narrative, charts and graphs, with data being provided in usable formats such as CSV and Excel. The ONS website also offers users the option to download the narrative in PDF format. In some instances other software may be used, or may be available on request. Available formats for content published on the ONS website but not produced by the ONS, or referenced on the ONS website but stored elsewhere, may vary. For further information please refer to the contact details at the beginning of this document.
The latest HPI Statistical Bulletin with accompanying briefing notes and reference tables can be downloaded for free from the ONS website from 9.30 am on the day of publication.
There is a list of the names of those given pre-release access to the contents of this release available. The list is from August 2013.
The following reference tables are available (please note that these are updated monthly):
| Table | Excel sheet name | Purpose | |-------|------------------|---------| | Table 1-19 | ONS HPI monthly and quarterly reference tables (3.32 Mb Excel sheet) | This reference table provides full historical series for the monthly tables accompanying the House Price Index statistical bulletin. | | Table 20-39 | Annual tables (1.16 Mb Excel sheet) | This reference table contains all the annual live tables transferred to ONS from DCLG. |
General enquiries on the HPI series, compilation methods, developmental articles, quality information or difficulties in finding the latest figures can be emailed to the HPI team in ONS at hpi@ons.gsi.gov.uk. For information regarding conditions of access to data, please refer to the links below:
- **Terms and conditions (for data on the website)**[^26],
- **Copyright and reuse of published data**[^27],
- **Pre-release access (including conditions of access)**[^28], and
- **Accessibility**[^29].
In addition to this Quality and Methodology Information, Basic Quality Information relevant to each release is available in the background notes of the ONS HPI statistical bulletin.
**Useful links**
- **HPI User Guidance webpage**[^11].
- **Definitions of general housing terms from DCLG**[^22].
**References**
| | | |---|---| | 1. | Office for National Statistics House Price Index | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/hpi/house-price-index/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/hpi/house-price-index/index.html) | | 2. | Department for Communities and Local Department (DCLG) | [https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-communities-and-local-government) | | 3. | Council of Mortgage Lenders (CML) | [http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/home](http://www.cml.org.uk/cml/home) | | 4. | National Statistician’s Review of House Price Statistics | [http://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/national-statistician/ns-reports-reviews-and-guidance/national-statistician-s-reviews/national-statistician-s-review-of-housing-market-statistics.html](http://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/national-statistician/ns-reports-reviews-and-guidance/national-statistician-s-reviews/national-statistician-s-review-of-housing-market-statistics.html) | | 5. | European Regulation | [http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:033:0014:0016:EN:PDF](http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:033:0014:0016:EN:PDF) | | 6. | Guidelines for Measuring Statistical Quality | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/quality/guidelines-for-measuring-statistical-quality/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/quality/guidelines-for-measuring-statistical-quality/index.html) | | 7. | UK National Statistics Publication Hub | [http://www.statistics.gov.uk/hub/index.html](http://www.statistics.gov.uk/hub/index.html) | | 8. | Code of Practice for Official Statistics. | [http://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/assessment/code-of-practice/index.html](http://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/assessment/code-of-practice/index.html) | | 9. | Official House Price Statistics Explained | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/hpi/house-price-index-guidance/official-house-price-statistics-explained/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/hpi/house-price-index-guidance/official-house-price-statistics-explained/index.html) | | 10. | Hedonic model | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/user-guidance/prices/hpi/hedonic-model.pdf](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/user-guidance/prices/hpi/hedonic-model.pdf) | | 11. | HPI User Guidance webpage. | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/user-guidance/prices/hpi/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/user-guidance/prices/hpi/index.html) | | 12. | HPI Methodology from DCLG website | [https://www.gov.uk/housing-market-and-house-price-information-notes-and-definitions](https://www.gov.uk/housing-market-and-house-price-information-notes-and-definitions) | | 13. | Guide to seasonal Adjustment with X-12-ARIMA | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/general-methodology/time-series-analysis/guide-to-seasonal-adjustment.pdf](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/general-methodology/time-series-analysis/guide-to-seasonal-adjustment.pdf) | | 14. | Statistical Disclosure Control | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/general-methodology/statistical-disclosure-control/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/general-methodology/statistical-disclosure-control/index.html) | | 15. | Revision policy | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/revisions/guide-to-statistical-revisions/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/revisions/guide-to-statistical-revisions/index.html) | | 16. | Land Registry House Price Index | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/external-links/other-government-departments/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/external-links/other-government-departments/index.html) | | 17. | Registers of Scotland Official Quarterly Housing Market Statistics | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/external-links/other-government-departments/ros--quarterly-housing-market-statistics.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/external-links/other-government-departments/ros--quarterly-housing-market-statistics.html) | | | | | |---|---|---| | 18. | Northern Ireland Residential Property Price Index | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/external-links/devolved-admins/nisra/nisra--northern-ireland-residential-property-price-index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/external-links/devolved-admins/nisra/nisra--northern-ireland-residential-property-price-index.html) | | 19. | Halifax House Price Index | [http://www.lloydsbankinggroup.com/media1/economic_insight/halifax_house_price_index_page.asp](http://www.lloydsbankinggroup.com/media1/economic_insight/halifax_house_price_index_page.asp) | | 20. | Nationwide House Price Index | [http://www.nationwide.co.uk/hpi/](http://www.nationwide.co.uk/hpi/) | | 21. | LSL Acadata House Price Index | [http://www.acadata.co.uk/acadHousePrices.php](http://www.acadata.co.uk/acadHousePrices.php) | | 22. | Definitions of general housing terms on DCLG website | [https://www.gov.uk/definitions-of-general-housing-terms](https://www.gov.uk/definitions-of-general-housing-terms) | | 23. | Housing Statistics Network | [http://www.housingstatisticsnetwork.org/](http://www.housingstatisticsnetwork.org/) | | 24. | List of pre-release access | [gov.uk/ons/rel/hpi/house-price-index/august-2013/pre-ml](gov.uk/ons/rel/hpi/house-price-index/august-2013/pre-ml) | | 25. | ONS HPI monthly and quarterly reference tables (3.32 Mb Excel sheet) | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/hpi/house-price-index/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/hpi/house-price-index/index.html) | | 26. | Terms and conditions (for data on website) | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/site-information/information/terms-and-conditions/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/site-information/information/terms-and-conditions/index.html) | | 27. | Copyright and reuse of published data | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/site-information/information/creative-commons-license/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/site-information/information/creative-commons-license/index.html) | | 28. | Pre-release access (including conditions of access) | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/the-national-statistics-standard/code-of-practice/pre-release-access/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/the-national-statistics-standard/code-of-practice/pre-release-access/index.html) | | 29. | Accessibility | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/site-information/information/accessibility/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/site-information/information/accessibility/index.html) |
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4924-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 9,
"total-input-tokens": 22069,
"total-output-tokens": 7418,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
2881,
1
],
[
2881,
7284,
2
],
[
7284,
11102,
3
],
[
11102,
15854,
4
],
[
15854,
19628,
5
],
[
19628,
23217,
6
],
[
23217,
26650,
7
],
[
26650,
31346,
8
],
[
31346,
33789,
9
]
]
} |
3ac0e5f11034e485760197a6563ec65aa064e438 | Quality and Methodology Information
General details
Title of output: House Price Statistics for Small Areas Abbreviated title: HPSSAs Designation: Official Statistics not designated as National Statistics Geographic coverage: England and Wales Date of last QMI: February 2014 Contact details: better.info@ons.gov.uk
Executive summary
This document provides information about House Price Statistics for Small Areas (HPSSAs), produced by us (ONS) since February 2015. Elements of these statistics were formerly produced by the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG). These statistics report the count, median price, mean price, lower quartile price and tenth percentile price of all residential dwellings sold and registered since 1995. They are calculated using open data from the Land Registry, a source of comprehensive record level administrative data on residential property transactions.
Statistics are reported for a range of subnational geographies in England and Wales. These cover:
1. English regions, England and Wales
2. Local authorities
3. Parliamentary constituencies
4. Middle layer super output areas (MSOAs)
5. Local enterprise partnerships
6. Travel to work areas
7. Rural-urban classification
Statistics are also reported for different types of dwelling, including newly built dwellings and existing dwellings, detached, semi-detached, terraced houses, flats/maisonettes and all house types combined.
The data used to produce HPSSAs is available each month when it is published by the Land Registry. The data are available from 1995 to the most recently completed month, and for the purpose of HPSSAs, the reference periods used are quarterly rolling years beginning with the year ending quarter 4 1995, and quarterly thereafter, covering the most recently completed 4 quarters.
The output contains a statistical bulletin, which supports reference tables containing all data. Interactive maps and charts are also produced where appropriate.
This document contains the following sections:
- Output quality
- About the output
- How the output is created
- Validation and quality assurance
- Concepts and definitions
- Other information, relating to quality trade-offs and user needs
- Sources of further information or advice Output quality
This section provides a range of information that describes the quality of the data and details any points that should be noted when using the output.
We have developed Guidelines for Measuring Statistical Quality, based upon the 5 European Statistical System (ESS) Quality Dimensions. This document addresses these quality dimensions and other important quality characteristics related to HPSSAs, which are:
- relevance
- timeliness and punctuality
- coherence and comparability
- accuracy
- output quality trade-offs
- assessment of user needs and perceptions
- accessibility and clarity
About the output
Relevance (The degree to which statistical outputs meet users’ needs.)
Following a review of house price statistics by the National Statistician, the HPSSAs were produced specifically for medium to smaller geographic areas, such as local authorities and middle layer super output areas in response to demand from users for an indication of house prices at this small area level. The review also concluded that house price statistics for different geographies should be available on a consistent basis. The HPSSAs provide this consistent geographic structure.
The Land Registry (LR) has provided the publically available, open data used in the production of these statistics. The information covers residential dwelling transactions, together with information on the prices paid and type of dwelling (newly built and existing stock, detached, semi-detached, terraced or flat/maisonette). This is known as Price Paid data. Using these data, we calculate counts of the number of sales, median, mean, lower quartile and tenth percentile house prices and publish them in a format which helps users gain the maximum benefit from a large dataset, helping to increase potential onward use of the statistics.
The LR Price Paid data, used in the production of these statistics, are comprehensive in that they capture changes of ownership for individual residential properties which have sold for full market value and covers both cash sales and those involving a mortgage. LR Price Paid data has been in existence since April 2000, with the LR collecting data back to the year 1995. Every change of ownership that is listed by LR is considered for use in the calculation of HPSSAs; therefore the data are a reliable indicator of actual prices paid.
However, HPSSAs should not be taken as a reflection of housing market values. The definitive set of UK, country and regional house price statistics is available in our House Price Index. The HPSSA and the House Price Index (HPI) follow similar trends, but the HPI is a mix adjusted index, which means it is weighted to reflect the actual mix of dwellings that exists. This HPI methodology is specifically designed to reflect market values, while the HPSSAs report average transactional values and are therefore particularly useful when considering house prices from a social change perspective rather than an economic perspective.
Geographic referencing
Geographic referencing is carried out using the National Statistics Postcode Lookup (NSPL) file, available on the ONS Open Geography Portal. The version used is the most up to date file at the time of production. In accordance with National Statistics Geography Policy each record is allocated to a middle layer super output area (MSOA) and all other geographies on which we report, using its address and postcode.
How the data are collected
The data are provided by the Land Registry (LR), a government department, responsible to the Lord Chancellor for maintaining the Land Register, a record of land ownership in England and Wales. The LR was established in 1862 and now operates under the provisions of the Land Registration Act of 1925. The purpose is to provide a guarantee of ownership as the basis for free movement of interests in land.
It is a statutory requirement for all the relevant details to be sent to the LR whenever a person transfers ownership of a property or takes a mortgage out against it. This change must be registered with the LR to make it legally effective. Over half of the applications for registration are received electronically and the rest are on paper forms. Data received via paper forms are then keyed into an electronic register. Historic data are retained within the files but are not shown on the Land Register.
**LR Price Paid Data** is used to produce our HPSSAs and the data is also released in conjunction with the **LR HPI**. LR Price Paid data follow the same release schedule as the LR HPI and any changes to the data are reported by the LR.
**Exclusions from the data**
The LR price paid data only include records for single residential properties sold for full market value (including sales made under the Government’s Help to Buy scheme). In order to avoid systematically biasing house price data, the LR excludes records of sales that were not at full market value. These are not included in the data from the LR and if included, would detract from a meaningful average house price figure. All exclusions cover:
1. All commercial transactions, including operational farms
2. Transfer, conveyances, assignments or leases at a premium with nominal rent which are:
- “right to buy” sales at a discount
- subject to a lease
- subject to an existing mortgage
- purchased with an identifiable buy to let mortgage
- to effect the sale of a share in a property
- by way of a gift
- by way of exchange
- under a compulsory purchase order
- under a court order
- to trustees
- vesting deeds
- transmissions or assents
- of more than one property
- leases for 7 years or less
**Timeliness and punctuality**
(Timeliness refers to the lapse of time between publication and the period to which the data refer. Punctuality refers to the gap between planned and actual publication dates.)
The HPSSAs can be produced and published within 4 months of the latest complete Price Paid data being published by the LR, which itself is made available on a monthly basis. For more details on related releases of LR data, the **GOV.UK release calendar** is available online and provides 12 months’ advance notice of release dates. In the unlikely event of a change to the pre-announced release schedule, we will notify you and provide the reasons for the change, as set out in the **Code of Practice for Official Statistics**.
**How the output is created**
**Associated files and preparation**
LR Price Paid data from LR are used to produce the HPSSA and the Price Paid data can be accessed for free via the **GOV.UK website** as a whole dataset or for individual years or months or by other specific search criteria.
In order to link LR Price Paid data to geographic information, the postcode of each transaction is matched to a postcode lookup file which can in turn be used to determine which MSOA and other geographies each transaction took place in. The postcode lookup used in the production of these statistics is the National Statistics Postcode Lookup (UK) (NSPL). This is a complete list of current and historic postcodes in the UK along with a selection of the statistical geographies they are situated within. The NSPL is produced by ONS Geography and is freely available for download. The most recent available version of the NSPL is used when the statistics are produced.
Joining data, geographic referencing and calculation
With datasets prepared, the NSPL dataset is matched to the LR Price Paid data using postcodes to assign the relevant statistical geographies to each house sale. This allows groups of sales with the same geographies to be formed and averages and sale counts to be calculated.
A final list of geographies with sale counts and averages is produced and then matched back to geography lists for completeness. Outputs are made into tables and published as House Price Statistics for Small Areas on our website.
Disclosure control
The LR data behind HPSSAs are record level data with a number of variables relating to the dwelling type and the sale, but no personal data relating to the seller or buyer. This is explained further on the LR's guidance page on accessing the Price Paid data. There is more detail in the LR Privacy Impact Assessment Review and the Review report: April 2013. The LR Price Paid data or the LR Price Paid Report Builder has more information on an individual sale.
Validation and quality assurance
Accuracy (The degree of closeness between an estimate and the true value.)
Registration of a property transaction with the LR is compulsory for all changes of ownership except leases with less than 7 years to run. Solicitors acting for purchasers invariably register the transaction as quickly as possible after completion. It is the view of the LR that under-recording is negligible. Therefore, such under-recording is unlikely to affect the statistics significantly.
The LR Price Paid data used in the HPSSAs are taken directly from the sale contract and are audited. Deliberate misreporting of price in this documentation would in most cases be fraud and is likely to be insignificant in volume. To minimise errors occurring in transcription, the LR has quality control procedures to check for exceptions in the data capture process such as price band and application type.
The LR Price Paid data contains records of each completed and registered residential dwelling transaction. Recent transactions can be registered with the LR after the publication of the Price Paid data, and so are not included in the HPSSAs. This is known as registration lag and is predominantly the case for transactions which occurred in the most recent quarter. For example, for statistics relating to the year ending quarter 2, 2015, it is the second quarter (April to June) of 2015 which is most likely to contain transactions which were not registered and included in the Price Paid data at the time it was published. Therefore, in this instance the number of house sales for the year ending quarter 2, 2015 in our HPSSAs is lower than the actual number of house sales that took place during this time. However, when the next data are published (year ending quarter 3, 2015) all previous periods (including year ending quarter 2, 2015) will be updated to reflect any additional registrations for transactions which took place during those previous periods. This means the effect of registration lag on the HPSSAs is minimised as much as possible.
Registration lag does not affect a sufficiently large enough number of records to influence the house price statistics in the HPSSAs, nor is it thought to affect one house type more than any other, and so a formal process of revision is not employed.
Information on duplicate records, geographical coverage and unmatched records is also produced alongside the output for quality assurance and analytical purposes. This section contains a brief summary of each of these areas along with tables summarising the number of records affected by these issues. For more detailed statistics, or specific queries regarding unmatched records, duplicate records and geographical coverage, please contact better.info@ons.gov.uk.
Duplicate records
The LR Price Paid data used to produce the HPSSAs contains what may appear to be duplicate records. These can occur when multiple properties (newly built flats for example) are sold as a batch with the same postcode, price and date. These records will still have unique identifiers, but every other variable may match. A process of identifying and quantifying these apparent duplicates was devised in order to identify spikes in duplicates that may require further investigation or deletion. Checks have been done to ensure that the data are deemed to be free of genuine erroneous duplicates which may distort dwelling prices.
Geographical coverage
It is important to note that the coverage of the published HPSSAs may not be 100% for all reported property types in all geographies. This is because some areas did not have enough house sales for a given property type in a given year to produce a robust median house price. This is most common for smaller geographic areas, such as MSOAs but, for example, affected no more than 25% of MSOAs in 2013. If, for a given year, for house type and area there were fewer than 5 sales records in the LR Price Paid data, the house price statistics are not reported in the HPSSAs. Therefore, coverage can vary throughout the time series. This issue has a negligible impact on coverage at the larger geographies and for the “All Types” category for all geographies.
Unmatched records
Part of the calculation process for HPSSAs is joining LR Price Paid data with the NSPL. This process does not always achieve a 100% match rate as not all house sale records have postcodes attributed to them and some that do, have erroneous or invalid postcodes that do not appear on the NSPL. These unmatched records are infrequent and show no bias to particular areas, price ranges or house types. Such records are not included in the calculation of median house price. Any error in the medians and number of transactions resulting from these unmatched records is negligible and assumed to be random. For example, between 1995 and 2013, 0.16% of records could not be matched to postcodes.
Quality assurance
In addition to assessing the extent of duplicate and unmatched records, and in order to quality assure the figures, a small sample of HPSSAs medians and counts with a broad geographical spread are re-calculated manually using the geographically referenced LR Price Paid raw dataset. These figures are cross checked to ensure the automated process worked correctly and outputs were accurate. Validation checks are also carried out by comparing the data produced with other house price data sources to identify similar trends (Coherence and comparability has further details).
Coherence and comparability
(Coherence is the degree to which data that is derived from different sources or methods, but refer to the same topic, are similar. Comparability is the degree to which data can be compared over time and domain, for example geographic level.)
Our HPSSAs are fully comparable throughout the time series going back to 1995 because a single method was used to produce statistics for all available periods, geographies and property types.
A house price index is a measure of the change in average house prices in an area between 2 points in time. An increase to an index of 1 means that house prices have increased by 1% between the 2 points in time. Currently, there are a number of different house price indices published in addition to HPSSAs. There are differences in the statistics reported by each index because there are differences in both the data and methods used to produce them. Therefore, the HPSSAs are not directly comparable with these other indices.
House Price Index (HPI)
The HPI is a monthly release that contains figures for mix-adjusted average house prices and house price indices for the UK, its constituent countries and the regions of England. The index is calculated using mortgage financed transactions that are collected via the Regulated Mortgage Survey by the Council of Mortgage Lenders. These cover the majority of mortgage lenders in the UK. The HPI complements other measures of inflation we publish, such as the Consumer Price Index, the Producer Price Index and the Services Producer Price Indices. Working with the LR, we are currently in the process of developing a new and improved methodology for the HPI. More information on this can be viewed in the proposed development of a new, definitive HPI - user consultation. Land Registry House Price Index
All residential property transactions in England and Wales are recorded by the LR and form the LR Price Paid data of single residential properties which have sold for full market value. These transactions are used for calculating the LR index. This index is based on repeat-sales regression, which calculates the change in price of any property transacted twice since 1995. Therefore, new build properties are excluded from the index. LR publishes indices at county, unitary authority metropolitan district and London borough levels and is published on the 20th working day of every month. It refers to all transactions of the preceding calendar month. The LR HPI can be accessed via the GOV.UK website.
Registers of Scotland Official Quarterly Housing Market Statistics
Registers of Scotland record all the property transactions in Scotland. It produces monthly average house prices based on arithmetic means of these transactions, which is published as the Quarterly House Price Statistics in the second month after the period to which the figures refer to.
Northern Ireland Residential Property Price Index
The Land and Property Services assisted by the Northern Ireland Statistics and Research Agency publish a quarterly Residential Property Prices Index (RPPI) for Northern Ireland. The index measures change in the price of residential property sales recorded by HM Revenue & Customs. This statistic was first published in quarter one of 2012.
Halifax House Price Index and Nationwide House Price Index
Both the Halifax bank and the Nationwide building society produces monthly house price indices based on their own mortgage approvals only and therefore, like the HPI, will not include any cash transactions. They both have UK-wide coverage, and because the Halifax and Nationwide use only their own data, they can process the data immediately and do not have to await the receipt of data from other lenders. The statistics can therefore be published sooner after the reference period than other monthly house price statistics.
Concepts and definitions
(Concepts and definitions describe the legislation governing the output and a description of the classifications used in the output.)
Median
The HPSSAs report median figures. The median is the value determined by putting all the house sales for a given year, area and type in order of price and then selecting the price of the house sale which falls in the middle, such that an equal number of transactions lie above and below that value. The median is less susceptible to distortion by the presence of extreme values than is the mean, and it is the most appropriate average given the near 100% sample of house sales.
Mean
The mean is the value determined by adding the values of all transactions for an area together and dividing it by the number of transactions that took place in that area. It is useful for comparing with the median to give an indication of the distribution of house prices in an area and assessing what affect extremely high value transactions have on this distribution. However, the median is the most appropriate measure of average house price.
Lower quartile
The lower quartile is the value determined by putting all the house sales for a given year, area and type in order of price and then selecting the price of the house sale which falls three quarters of the way down the list, such that 75% of transactions lie above and 25% lie below that value. These are particularly useful for assessing housing affordability when viewed alongside average and lower quartile income for given areas. Tenth Percentile
The tenth percentile is the value determined by putting all the house sales, for a given year, area and type, in order of price and then selecting the price of the house sale which falls nine-tenths of the way down the list, such that 90% of transactions lie above and 10% lie below that value. These give an idea of the prices paid for the very cheapest housing in a given area and helps determine housing affordability for those on particularly low income.
Transaction
A transaction occurs when a change of freeholder or leaseholder takes place regardless of the amount of money involved. Similarly, an exchange of properties would be classed as 2 transactions. The transaction covers both the property and the land on which it stands; this could be extensive, but operational farms and other commercial properties are excluded from the LR Price Paid data. Other exclusions are described on page 3 of this document.
Transaction price and market value
The LR records the transaction price, that is, the actual price for which the property changed hands. This will usually be an accurate reflection of the market value for the individual property, but it is not always the case. For example, if the ownership of a property is transferred from one individual to another within the same family the price may be fixed by agreement at a level quite different from the market value. Similarly, if the transaction was agreed under the legislation which gives council tenants the right to buy their home, the price would have been discounted.
In order to generate statistics that more accurately reflect market values, the LR has excluded records of houses that were not sold at market value from the dataset. The remaining data are considered a good reflection of market values at the time of the transaction. However, the LR Price Paid data are not adjusted to reflect the mix of houses in a given area. Fluctuations in the types of house that are sold in that area can cause differences between the median transactional value of houses and the overall market value of houses. The HPSSAs are an accurate measure of social change with regards to house prices, and not an economic measure of change or inflation.
Other information
Output quality trade-offs (Trade-offs are the extent to which different dimensions of quality are balanced against each other.)
This output is not subject to scheduled revisions, however, the raw data used to calculate these statistics are occasionally revised to maintain the highest possible quality. When this happens, the latest release of House Price Statistics for Small Areas will be calculated using the revised data and any revised historic data will be included in the latest release.
If a particular area contained fewer than 5 property sales in a given year, the median, mean, lower quartile and tenth percentile are not reported. A minimum of 5 records is deemed necessary to produce a robust median house price, indicative of the prices in a particular area. This was agreed by our methodologists and has been standard practice with DCLG in historic releases. This approach results in some areas lacking 100% coverage, in particular the smaller geographic areas and individual house types.
Summary of the main users of House Price Statistics for Small Areas
In order to identify the users and uses of HPSSA, regular communication with other producers of house price statistics, such as our HPI team, Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) and the LR, was carried out to understand the types of request users make for more detailed statistics on house prices. The Neighbourhood Statistics Service team and our customer contact centre were also consulted to help gather more information about the potential users of HPSSA. The following broad groups of users have been identified:
- central government: monitoring housing trends, supply and demand in society, policy making and regulation
- local government: monitoring and developing their housing policies to meet the current and future needs of their areas and to understand how changes and policies at the national level affect housing at the local authority level • devolved administrations: supporting policy making and monitoring changes at the country level, similar to those requirements of central government; also used for comparisons to wider UK policies
• banks and building societies: house price statistics are used for mortgage lending in order to make decisions on whether to lend, how much to lend, and setting interest rates
• house builders: house builders are interested in whether and where demand for new housing exists, and the returns received on homes built or converted
• housing industry specialists: these include organisations such as larger estate agents seeking information on small area trends
• housing bodies: these include organisations such as the Home Builders Federation
• media: make use of the data to inform and aid journalistic coverage of local housing markets
• social researchers: data may be indicative of social status and may be used in the development of further statistics and social analysis
• academics: include geographers and sociologists who make use of these statistics for study and analysis
Sources of further information or advice
Accessibility and clarity
(Accessibility is the ease with which users are able to access the data, also reflecting the format in which the data are available and the availability of supporting information. Clarity refers to the quality and sufficiency of the release details, illustrations and accompanying advice.)
The recommended format for accessible content is downloadable content and web content for narrative, charts and graphs, with data being provided in usable formats such as CSV and Excel. The data for these statistics are available from our website; users can also download the narrative in PDF format. For further information please refer to the contact better.info@ons.gov.uk.
For information regarding conditions of access to data, please refer to the links below:
• terms and conditions (for data on the website) • copyright and reuse of published data • pre-release access (including conditions of access) • accessibility
In addition to this Quality and Methodology Information, all HPSSA publications are available with analytical content and data.
Useful links
Land Registry information on LR Price Paid data
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4925-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 8,
"total-input-tokens": 28136,
"total-output-tokens": 5917,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
2269,
1
],
[
2269,
6013,
2
],
[
6013,
9482,
3
],
[
9482,
13800,
4
],
[
13800,
18014,
5
],
[
18014,
21638,
6
],
[
21638,
25839,
7
],
[
25839,
28106,
8
]
]
} |
77ee49ad046256c3af5b2708ce92c4f1db5c201d | Quality and Methodology Information
General details
Title of output: International Trade in Services Abbreviated title: ITIS Designation: National Statistics Geographic coverage: UK including Northern Ireland Contact details: itis@ons.gov.uk
Executive summary
This report relates to the International Trade in Services (ITIS) survey. The ITIS survey is conducted on both an annual and quarterly basis with both surveys measuring the value of transactions of UK businesses by country of origin and destination. The quarterly sample is made up of approximately 1,100 businesses and the annual sample made up of approximately 14,500 businesses. The survey data from both the quarterly and annual results are combined to produce the annual ITIS estimates and are used as a key data source to compile total trade in service estimates. In 2009, the ITIS survey incorporated the Film and Television survey which was discontinued as a standalone survey in 2008. The ITIS survey is also supplemented by information collected via the Annual Business Survey (ABS) in relation to amounts paid or received for the imports or exports of services. Care is taken during the sampling and estimation process to avoid duplication between surveys.
ITIS data are collected by both industry and product on a geographical basis, by collecting data for the countries to which services are exported to and where they are imported from. These data are primarily used in the compilation of the services account for the UK’s Balance of Payments (BoP), which in turn contributes towards the measure of UK Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The ITIS estimates are published annually and are freely available via the ONS website.
This document contains the following sections:
- Output quality;
- About the output;
- How the output is created;
- Validation and quality assurance;
- Concepts and definitions; and
- Sources for further information or advice. Output quality (This document provides a range of information that describes the quality of the output and details any points that should be noted when using the output.)
ONS has developed Guidelines for Measuring Statistical Quality; these are based upon the five European Statistical System (ESS) quality dimensions. This document addresses these quality dimensions and other important quality characteristics, which are:
- Relevance;
- Timeliness and punctuality;
- Coherence and comparability;
- Accuracy;
- Output quality trade-offs;
- Assessment of user needs and perceptions; and
- Accessibility and clarity.
More information is provided about these quality dimensions in the sections below.
About the output Relevance (The degree to which the statistical outputs meet users’ needs.)
The results of the annual and quarterly ITIS survey, represent a key element of the BoP account and of Gross Domestic Product (GDP). The results are published in detail in the ITIS publication. The results from the ITIS survey make up approximately 50% of total exports and 38% of total imports of the Trade in Services Account for 2012.
As a condition of membership to the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the UK is obliged to provide detailed trade in services information. The Statistical Office of the European Communities (Eurostat) also requires a detailed geographical breakdown of trade in services products to allow construction of European Union (EU) aggregates. The geographical data also allow the analysis of bilateral asymmetries between member states to take place. As such, businesses taking part in the ITIS survey are required to respond under the Statistics of Trade Act 1947.
The data are also used by Supply/Use Production branch within National Accounts. Tables are provided containing industrial and non-industrial service breakdown. They use the weighted flows of the industry and product matrix data from ITIS for the analyses of industrial and non-industrial services supplied by the ABS.
Government and business users also use the data for economic assessment. The Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) states that the ITIS survey is the only source of product detail for UK services and is essential for UK regional exports analyses. BIS also use the ITIS survey data to monitor the competitiveness of UK businesses and to gain a better understanding of the level of service exports.
In addition, The Scottish Government (SG) also show significant interest in the survey results to supplement Scotland’s Global Connections Survey (GCS), and the Department for Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) use the ITIS data in one of their main outputs, The Creative Industries Statistical Bulletin.
Respondents are selected by industry and employment and can also be identified by product or geography in order to produce various aggregates for analysis.
The 2011 edition of the ITIS publication contained for the first time a series of static and interactive infographics which were developed to enhance the overall look of the publication and make the product more appealing to users.
Survey History
- Prior to 1996, the ITIS survey collected only two products; royalties and other services;
- From 1996, the sample increased to 39 products, with an increase to the survey size. Each product has its own identifiable code. In 2001, two additional product codes were introduced for Insurance Brokers and Management Charges. Insurance Brokers was taken over from another survey, whilst Management Charges was a subset of code 19 ‘other’.
In 2001, following a recommendation from the 1998 Triennial review, the annual ITIS survey sample size was increased from 10,000 to 20,000 businesses.
2002 saw the introduction of three further codes, all subsets of code 19 ‘other’. These were Procurement, Publishing Services and Recruitment and Training.
In 2005, as a result of a questionnaire review, ITIS codes were reviewed, and the number of codes increased from 44 to 51 as a result, including the collection of ‘Commodity Traders’.
In 2007, the random sample element of annual ITIS which collected detailed product information was reduced from 13,500 businesses to 9,500 businesses. This was to accommodate the inclusion of approximately 9,000 businesses sampled from the ABS where only a total imports and exports values is reported. This reduced the compliance costs for ITIS resulting in a total sample size of approximately 18,500 businesses.
In 2009, The Film and Television survey was incorporated into the annual ITIS survey.
In 2010, The Film and Television survey was incorporated into the quarterly ITIS survey.
In 2010, both the quarterly and annual samples were optimally re-allocated. The quarterly panel increased by 350 businesses bringing the total sample size to approximately 1,100. To keep compliance costs static, the annual panel was reduced by approximately 1,400 businesses overall, keeping the annual and quarterly sample size constant.
Changes to the Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) (from SIC 2003 to SIC 2007) were implemented into the ITIS annual 2009 and quarterly 2010 surveys.
In 2011, work began to ensure that the surveys became compliant with Balance of Payments manual 6 (BPM6) as required by Eurostat.
In 2013, the revised ITIS questionnaire was dispatched to all quarterly respondents to collect data as defined in the Balance of Payments manual 6 (BPM6). The survey increased to 52 service products overall to comply with BPM6.
In 2014, the revised ITIS questionnaire was dispatched to all annual respondents collecting data for the survey year of 2013.
**Timeliness and punctuality**
(Timeliness refers to the lapse of time between publication and the period to which the data refer. Punctuality refers to the gap between planned and actual publication dates.)
The ITIS Publication is published annually. This covers the reference period from the 1 January to 31 December. The latest publication was released on 30 January 2014 (13 months after the reference period) and includes results for 2013 calendar year.
For more details on ITIS releases, the UK National Statistics Publication Hub is available online and provides 13 months advance notice of release dates. In the unlikely event of a change to the pre-announced release schedule, public attention would be drawn to the change and the reasons for the change would be explained fully at the same time, as set out in the Code of Practice for Official Statistics.
The ITIS survey consistently meets publication deadlines, with a 100% record of on-time releases. How the output is created
The process for creating the outputs for the ITIS survey is detailed below in the following table:
| Sample frame | There are two sampling frames used by ITIS. These are: | |--------------|--------------------------------------------------------| | **Inter-Departmental Business Register (IDBR)** - the IDBR covers businesses in all parts of the economy, except those that are not registered for Value Added Tax (VAT) or Pay As You Earn (PAYE) which can include very small businesses, the self employed, those without employees and those with a low turnover. The IDBR contains over 2 million UK businesses and is updated in real time from administrative data received from HM Customs and Excise. The IDBR is used by other government departments and is the main sampling frame for business surveys. | | **Reference list** - the reference list is made up of approximately 5,000 businesses which have been identified as businesses known to conduct trade in services. These businesses are classified on the reference list as either known traders or potential knowns. Businesses are identified through returns they have made on ONS business surveys such as Annual ITIS and on feeder questions on other ONS surveys that is, ABS. |
| Sample design | The ITIS sample is stratified by SIC 2007 at four digit level and employment. | |---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------| | The nature of the ITIS survey means that sampling from the IDBR can be inefficient, as an overwhelming proportion of businesses would have nil returns because no trade in services was conducted. To address this, part of the solution has been to include filter questions on other large domestic business surveys such as the ABS. Currently, two questions are present on ABS questionnaires which specifically relate to ITIS and collect total amounts paid or received for the provision or receipt of service imports or exports. | | The ITIS samples are very fluid. Businesses can move between the annual and quarterly sample and vice versa depending on the level of their returns. This is outlined below: |
- **Annual business Survey**
- collects only total imports and exports figures
- **Businesses identified with large ITIS figures will be sampled by annual ITIS**
- **Annual ITIS Survey**
- collects full range of service products on an annual basis
- **Businesses consistently reporting large ITIS values will be promoted to the quarterly panel**
- **Quarterly ITIS survey**
- collects full range of service products on an quarterly basis
- **Businesses who experience a significant drop in ITIS can move back to the annual panel or out of scope of ITIS altogether**
This is also supplemented by other known indicators of trade in service activity which include:
- sampling from the IDBR for industries where trade in services is common, these are known as high propensity industries; and
- known large respondents.
### Sample size
The sample size for both annual and quarterly ITIS is as follows.
- **Annual**: approximately 14,500 businesses.
- **Quarterly**: approximately 1,100 businesses.
The quarterly and annual samples are mutually exclusive so that no businesses would be sampled for both surveys for the same reference period.
NB: The annual ITIS publication incorporates the quarterly sample and also combines the data collected via the ABS. In total, annual ITIS results are based on data from approximately 24,000 UK businesses.
### Sample exclusions
ITIS sample businesses from a large proportion of the UK economy, however there, are a number of notable exceptions. ITIS excludes businesses which fall within the following sectors of the economy:
- travel;
- transport;
- banking;
- other financial institutions;
- higher education;
- charities; and
- a large proportion of businesses within the legal profession.
Business within these sectors are excluded to avoid duplication in national accounts outputs. Data are sourced for these sectors from alternative means such as other ONS surveys or by use of administrative data.
### Data collection
ITIS data are collected using paper questionnaires with manual input of data onto the system.
In order to improve the efficiency of the survey operations and reduce the burden on respondents, Telephone Data Entry (TDE) is now being used for annual respondents to register a nil response.
Data relating to the import/export of goods are excluded from this survey as they are already collected in the estimates for Trade in Goods. However, merchanting, earnings from arranging the sale of goods between two countries outside the UK and where the goods never physically enter the UK, are included along with earnings from commodity trading. As with merchanting, the service element is calculated as the businesses profit minus the loss.
### Response
Written reminders are issued to non-responders which are subsequently followed by telephone reminders in order to try and minimise non-response and any associated non-response bias.
The ITIS survey is covered under the Statistics of Trade Act 1947 meaning legal action can be taken against persistent non-responders, though ONS prefers to work together with businesses to produce the necessary information.
Response rates are analysed on a weekly basis. The number of questionnaires received and cleared after validation are documented.
Response rate targets are 85% for both annual and quarterly ITIS.
### Validation
Returned information is run through a series of checks to identify errors. These checks ensure that:
1. responses to individual questions are consistent within the questionnaire as a whole, that is, totals equate to the sum of the parts; and
2. the return is consistent with historical data from the business.
### Data clearance
Data clearance is the point at which data become error free. The target clearance rates for both annual and quarterly ITIS are 98% of the achieved response by the agreed close down date.
### Outliers
The method of outlier detection and treatment is based on the principle of Winsorisation. The aim is to identify the sample observations which are felt not to be representative of unsampled companies. Outliered values are identified and modified prior to estimation using one-sided Winsorisation (since there are no negative values given as part of ITIS). | **Imputation** | Imputation takes place when sampled respondents do not respond. Two methods of imputation are used by ITIS.\
**Ratio imputation** - this method is used where historical data for a non-responder are present. Data are taken from the previous corresponding periods and up-rated by the average growth within the same cell.\
**Means of ratio** - this method is used for non-responders where no historical data are present. An imputed value is calculated by averaging returns from within the same cell as the non-responder. | | **Estimation** | For the annual survey, Horvitz-Thompson estimation is used to produce estimates for the entire population from sampled data. Estimates are produced separately for each industry by employment stratum and aggregated to produce high level estimates.\
The exception is the data obtained from the ABS. Estimation is performed by multiplying design weighted responses by the imputation weight and aggregating to the appropriate level. | | **Disclosure** | Statistical disclosure control methodology is applied to ITIS survey data. This ensures that information attributable to an individual or individual organisation is not identifiable in any published outputs. The Code of Practice for Official Statistics and specifically the Principle on Confidentiality set out practices for how we protect data from being disclosed. The Principle includes the statement that ONS outputs should ‘ensure that official statistics do not reveal the identity of an individual or organisation or any private information relating to them, taking into account other relevant sources of information’. More information can be found in National Statistician’s Guidance: Confidentiality of Official Statistics and also on the Statistical Disclosure Control Methodology page of the ONS website. |
### Annual ITIS processing Cycle based on 2013 as the reference Period
- **ITIS Statistical Bulletin published January 2015**
- **Selection September/October 2013**
- **Despatch forms January 2014**
- **Close for Provisional results April 2014**
- **Deliver Provisional Results June 2014**
- **Close for final results September/October 2014**
- **Deliver final results November 2014**
- **Benchmark quarterly data using 2013 estimates November 2014**
- **Annual time cycle** Validation and quality assurance
Accuracy (The degree of closeness between an estimate and the true value.)
Sampling error
Sampling error is the error caused by observing a sample instead of the whole population. While each sample is designed to produce the ‘unbiased’ estimate of the true population value, a number of equal sized samples covering the population would generally produce varying population estimates. Sample surveys are employed rather than censuses in order to balance the burden on businesses and cost of collection, processing and quality, against the relative accuracy of an estimate instead of a population value. Standard errors are an estimate of the sampling error and provide a measure of the precision of the estimate. A low standard error indicates a precise estimate. To aid comparison, the standard error is also expressed as a percentage of the total value. This quantity is called the coefficient of variation and it allows the standard errors to be put into context. A high coefficient of variation indicates a greater relative variation between the true population value and the estimated value from the sample.
Non-sampling error
In addition to sampling errors, there is the potential for non-sampling error that cannot be easily quantified. One potential source of non-sampling error is non-response, which relates to the failure to obtain data from some businesses selected in the sample. Another source of non-sampling error may be undetected deficiencies that may occur in the survey register and errors or inconsistencies may be submitted by the respondent when completing the survey questionnaires.
The ITIS response rates and estimated standard errors are available in Appendix A of the ITIS Publication and further information can be found within the Office for National Statistics.
Coherence and comparability (Coherence is the degree to which data that are derived from different sources or methods, but refer to the same topic, are similar. Comparability is the degree to which data can be compared over time and domain for example, geographic level.)
Coherence
The ITIS survey is the only source of UK trade in services microdata, and as a result, ITIS data are an invaluable source for customers using these key economic indicators. ABS does have a filter question regarding imports or exports of services which was solely created to increase coverage of the ITIS survey. ABS only collect total trade in services, no breakdown by product or country is recorded.
Comparability
The ITIS survey is designed in accordance with Eurostat regulations (European Commission (No.12461/03)) to ensure comparability across EU member states in the compilation of these Statistics.
ITIS results appear in various ONS publications such as the Balance of Payments (BoP) and Pink book. The data contained within the BoP and Pink book publications represent the economy as a whole. Industries specifically excluded by ITIS that is, travel, transport and banking are included by the Trade in Services branch ensuring full coverage of Trade in Services data within the services account and can also be found in the UK Trade publication.
In 2011, work began to implement recommendations made in the latest Balance of Payments manual 6 (BPM6) which in respect of ITIS resulted in the questionnaire being thoroughly reviewed. New questions were added, increasing the total number to 52, and the descriptions surrounding all questions were reviewed. In some instances, the descriptions were enhanced to make it clearer to respondents what should be reported. The most notable change to the questionnaire was the rebranding of the ‘Royalties and Licenses’ section to ‘Intellectual Property’ which increased from four questions to six. Collecting the data according to the new regulations also meant a new production system was required. A full review carried out by ITIS specialists of all ITIS methods and their recommendations formed the basis for the new platform. Concepts and definitions (Concepts and definitions describe the legislation governing the output, and a description of the classifications used in the output.)
The ITIS survey is mandatory and is collected under the Statistics of Trade Act 1947. Detailed SIC 2007 is available on the ONS website. Data is collected in accordance with the latest edition of the Balance of Payments (BPM6) manual.
Other information Assessment of user needs and perceptions (The processes for finding out about uses and users, and their views on the statistical products.)
Data from the ITIS survey are used by a wide range of users. The key users are:
- Department for Culture Media and Sport (DCMS)
- British Film Institute (BFI)
- Department for Business, Innovation & Skills
- The Scottish Government
The UK Statistics Authority has reviewed this output in their report: Assessment of compliance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics: Statistics of International Transactions, which was published on 8 December 2011. This review recommended that ITIS estimates be designated as National Statistics on 3 May 2013.
Sources for further information or advice Accessibility and clarity (Accessibility is the ease with which users are able to access the data, also reflecting the format in which the data are available and the availability of supporting information. Clarity refers to the quality and sufficiency of the release details, illustrations and accompanying advice.)
The annual survey data are published in the publication entitled International Trade in Services which is freely available from the Office for National Statistics.
Each publication includes a Basic Quality information section which is included in Appendix A, to enable users to further understand the complexities of the ITIS survey.
ONS’s recommended format for accessible content is a combination of HTML web pages for narrative, charts and graphs, with data being provided in usable formats such as CSV and Excel. The ONS website also offers users the option to download the narrative in PDF format. In some instances other software may be used, or may be available on request. Available formats for content published on the ONS website but not produced by the ONS, or referenced on the ONS website but stored elsewhere, may vary. For further information please refer to the contact details at the beginning of this document.
For information regarding conditions of access to data, please refer to the links below:
- Terms and conditions (for data on the website)
- Copyright and reuse of published data
- Pre-release access (including conditions of access)
- Accessibility
Further queries can be addressed to the ITIS public enquiry team by email to: itis@ons.gov.uk.
Useful links
- Balance of Payments and National Accounts
- The European System of Accounts (ESA(95))
- Balance of Payments 2004 Pink Book
- Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) | Title of Reference | Website Location | |--------------------|------------------| | 1. ITIS Public Enquiry Team | itis@ons.gov.uk | | 2. International Trade in Services | http://ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/specific/economy/international-trade-in-services/index.html | | 3. Annual Business Survey | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/specific/business-and-energy/annual-business-survey/index.html | | 4. UK Balance of Payments | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/taxonomy/index.html?nscl=Balance+of+Payments | | 5. Guidelines for Measuring Statistical Quality | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/method-quality/guidelines-for-measuring-statistical-quality/index.html | | 6. Gross Domestic Product | http://www.ukpublicspending.co.uk/spending_chart_1950_2010UKb_11s1l011cn_UK_Gross_Domestic_Product | | 7. ITIS Publications | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/taxonomy/index.html?nscl=International+Trade+in+Services | | 8. International Monetary Fund | http://www.imf.org/ | | 9. The Statistical Office of the European Communities | http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat | | 10. Statistics of Trade Act 1947 | http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/10-11/39 | | 11. The Department of Business, Innovation and Skills | https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-for-business-innovation-skills | | 12. The Scottish Government | http://home.scotland.gov.uk/home | | 13. Department of Culture Media and Sport | http://www.culture.gov.uk/ | | 14. Standard Industrial Classification 2007 | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/classifications/current-standard-classifications/standard-industrial-classification/index.html | | 15. Balance of Payments manual 6 | http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/bop/2007/bopman6.htm | | 16. UK National Statistics Publication Hub | http://www.statistics.gov.uk | | 17. Code of Practice for Official Statistics | http://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/assessment/code-of-practice/index.html | | 18. ITIS Sample Sizes | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/about-ons/get-involved/taking-part-in-a-survey/information-for-businesses/a-to-z-of-business-surveys/annual-survey-of-international-trade-in-services/index.html | | 19. Trade in Goods | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/search/index.html?newquery=Trade+in+Goods | | 20. National Statistician’s Guidance: Confidentiality of Official Statistics | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/search/index.html?pageSize=50&newquery=National+Statistician%E2%80%99s+Guidance%3A+Confidentiality+of+Official+Statistics | | 21. Statistical Disclosure Control Methodology | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/best-practice/disclosure-control-policy-for-tables/index.html | | 22. Office for National Statistics | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/index.html | | 23. National Accounts | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/taxonomy/index.html?nscl=National+Accounts | | 24. Supply Use Group | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/taxonomy/index.html?nscl=Supply+and+Use+Tables | | 25. British Film Institute (BFI) | http://www.bfi.org.uk/ | | 26. Assessment of compliance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics | http://www.statisticsauthority.gov.uk/assessment/assessment-assessment-reports/index.html | | 27. Terms and conditions (for data on the website) | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/site-information/information/terms-and-conditions/index.html | | 28. Copyright and reuse of published data | http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/site-information/information/creative-commons-license/index.html | | | | |---|---| | 29. Pre-release access (including conditions of access) | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/the-national-statistics-standard/code-of-practice/pre-release-access/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/guide-method/the-national-statistics-standard/code-of-practice/pre-release-access/index.html) | | 30. Accessibility | [http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/site-information/information/accessibility/index.html](http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/site-information/information/accessibility/index.html) | | 31. Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development | [http://www.oecd.org/](http://www.oecd.org/) |
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4926-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 10,
"total-input-tokens": 31291,
"total-output-tokens": 6537,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1928,
1
],
[
1928,
5288,
2
],
[
5288,
8540,
3
],
[
8540,
11514,
4
],
[
11514,
14933,
5
],
[
14933,
17239,
6
],
[
17239,
21243,
7
],
[
21243,
24197,
8
],
[
24197,
27636,
9
],
[
27636,
28254,
10
]
]
} |
adf0d6112e9353b02a2ea21e3128259f39ea6b1a | Quality Report: Woodland Statistics
Introduction Annual UK woodland statistics comprise the following:
- Woodland area,
- Certified woodland area,
- New planting,
- Publicly funded restocking, and
- The Woodland Carbon Code (released quarterly until April 2018).
The data are compiled by Forest Research from a number of sources:
- National Forest Inventories (estimates of GB woodland area),
- Northern Ireland Woodland Register (woodland area in Northern Ireland),
- Forestry Commission(^1), Forestry England, Scottish Forestry, Forestry and Land Scotland, Welsh Government, Natural Resources Wales and Forest Service administrative records of new planting and restocking – FE/FLS/NRW(Welsh Government Woodland Estate)/FS woodlands and grant schemes,
- Forest Stewardship Council (www.fsc-uk.org) and Programme for the Endorsement of Forest Certification (www.pefc.co.uk/) follow-up enquiries with certificate holders for data on certified woodland areas, and
- UK Woodland Carbon Registry, housed on the Markit Environmental Registry (www.markit.com/product/registry).
Relevance The main uses of woodland statistics include:
- Statistics on woodland area, planting and restocking are used to inform government policy and resource allocation;
- Statistics on woodland area, often in the form of percentage land cover, are frequently used to provide context to UK forestry and land management issues;
- Woodland Carbon Code statistics are used to monitor the uptake of this voluntary standard for woodland creation projects in the UK;
(^1) From 1 April 2019, the Forestry Commission’s responsibilities for management of forests transferred to Forestry England and to Forestry and Land Scotland. National indicators – woodland area and planting statistics are published in the Forestry Commission England Corporate Plan Performance Indicators, and the Woodland for Wales Indicators (Welsh Government);
UK Government Departments and devolved administrations – statistics on woodland area, often combined with other figures on land use, are used in a number of statistical publications produced by others, including the Office for National Statistics (UK Environmental Accounts, Sustainable Development Indicators) and the Scottish Government (Key Scottish Environment Statistics);
International reporting – Figures for woodland area in the UK are provided to international organisations; the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) for the 5-yearly Global Forest Resources Assessment (www.fao.org/forestry/fra/en), and Forest Europe for the 4-5-yearly State of Europe’s Forests (www.foresteurope.org/reporting_SFM). Data on planting and restocking also contribute to these reports;
Figures for woodland area and new planting are used to compile the UK’s Greenhouse Gas Inventory for the Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) sector, submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC, http://unfccc.int/national_reports/annex_i_ghg_inventories/national_inventories_submissions/items/8108.php). Statistics on UK greenhouse gas emissions are published by the Department of Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (BEIS) at www.gov.uk/government/collections/uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions-statistics.
Those responsible for the international and national reporting are consulted regularly to ensure that the statistics remain relevant to users.
Accuracy A number of checks are performed on the data to ensure accuracy, including checks against data for previous years.
Sampling standard errors are produced for the field survey of the National Forest Inventory. Estimates produced to date are available in the NFI reports at www.forestreresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/national-forest-inventory/.
Figures for woodland area (and consequently certified woodland area) may be revised between the provisional figures (released in June) and the final figures (released in September) or in subsequent releases if an updated woodland map is available from the National Forest Inventory. Other figures are rarely revised. Timeliness and punctuality
Provisional results are published in *Provisional Woodland Statistics* in mid June, around 2.5 months after the end of the reference period (year to March). *Provisional Woodland Statistics* was first released in June 2019 and replaces the annual National Statistics release *Woodland Area, Planting and Publicly Funded Restocking* and the previously quarterly Official Statistics release *Woodland Carbon Code Statistics*.
Final results are published in *Forestry Statistics* at end September, 6 months after the end of the reference period (year to March).
Accessibility and clarity
The annual *Forestry Statistics* publication, available on the Forest Research website at [www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/](http://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/), provides the most comprehensive results, including background information on the sources, data collected, methodology, revisions and reporting. Excel and ODS versions of all tables are also available to download. *Forestry Statistics* is published in line with Forest Research’s website accessibility statement.
Longer time series data, for new planting and restocking and for certified area, are published in accompanying tables to *Provisional Woodland Statistics* and to *Forestry Statistics*. These tables are available to download from the Forest Research website in Excel and ODS formats.
Summary results are also published in *Forestry Facts & Figures*, available on the Forest Research website at [www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/](http://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/).
Comparability
Statistics on woodland area, planting and restocking have been produced for some time, with limited data available back to 1919. Woodland inventories have been run in Great Britain every 15 years or so, with slight differences in definitions of woodland between inventories. Certified woodland data have been collected since 2001 and annually since 2004. Complete new planting and restocking data for the UK are available since 1976.
Woodland Carbon Code statistics were first collected in 2012. There are no other directly comparable statistics on projects registered under the Woodland Carbon Code. The UK definition of woodland is land under stands of trees with a minimum size of 0.5 hectares and a canopy cover of at least 20% (25% in Northern Ireland), or having the potential to achieve this, including integral open space, and including felled areas that are awaiting restocking. For the National Forest Inventory (NFI), a minimum width of 20 metres is also applied. More details can be found on the NFI pages at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/national-forest-inventory/. The UK definition differs slightly from the international definition which has a 10% minimum canopy cover (or the potential to achieve it) threshold.
The figures shown for Natural Resources Wales in Provisional Woodland Statistics (and previously Woodland Area, New Planting and Restocking), in Forestry Facts and Figures and in Forestry Statistics relate to the Welsh Government Woodland Estate. There is approximately 900 hectares of woodland on National Nature Reserves and other land managed by Natural Resources Wales that is not included in the Natural Resources Wales figures.
Coherence Statistics on woodland area are also available from the Countryside Survey (www.countrysidesurvey.org.uk). This sample survey is run at intervals of 8-9 years, most recently in 2007, 1998 and 1990. It reports approximately the same total woodland area, but very different figures for gains and losses. Unlike in forestry statistics, harvested areas and newly planted areas are assigned to other broad habitats until 25% canopy cover is achieved. The Countryside Survey estimate is therefore of actual woodland cover rather than woodland area.
Statistics on woodland cover are also available from the Land Cover Map (LCM) linked to each Countryside Survey; a more recent Land Cover Map 2015 is also available. The LCM is based on satellite imagery.
Statistics on land cover and land use are produced by Eurostat, from the Land Use/Cover Area frame Survey (LUCAS). Further details are available at http://eusoils.jrc.ec.europa.eu/projects/Lucas/.
The carbon sequestration calculations conform to the guidelines of the Woodland Carbon code, which can be found at www.woodlandcarboncode.org.uk/. Revisions
Our revisions policy sets out how revisions and errors to our statistics are dealt with, and can be found at: www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/about-our-statistics/code-of-practice/quality-of-official-statistics/.
Statistics on woodland area in Great Britain are potentially subject to major revision when results become available from new national forest inventories, and minor revisions when new woodland maps are produced. Other statistics on woodland area and planting, and on the woodland carbon code are not normally revised.
Information on significant revisions made to published statistics is available in the Annex.
Other issues related to quality
The methodology and outputs relevant to UK woodland area, planting and restocking were reviewed in 2014. The review report is available at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/about-our-statistics/methodology-and-outputs/.
For statistics published annually to 2010, private sector (non-FC) woodland area figures for Great Britain were extrapolated forward from 1995-99, taking account of new planting and sales of FE/FLS/NRW woodland, but making no adjustment for woodland converted to another land use. Statistics for FE/FLS/NRW woodland areas published annually to 2010 were obtained from administrative systems.
Data from the new National Forest Inventory have been used for estimates of both FE/FLS/NRW and private sector woodland areas since the 2011 edition of Woodland Area, Planting and Restocking (see Annex). Revised estimates for woodland areas in Great Britain, based on the National Forest Inventory, have been produced for 1998 to 2009, to give a consistent time series (enabling comparisons over time).
New planting estimates for England also include areas supported by the Woodland Trust and (until 2014-15) areas funded under Natural England’s Higher Level Stewardship Scheme. Areas of land acquired by the National Forest Company for new planting have been included from Woodland Area, Planting and Restocking: 2017 Edition for 2015-16 and 2016-17.
Local estimates for private sector areas of planting and restocking which are not grant-aided were included for England, Wales and Scotland up to 2009-10, where possible. Estimates of non-grant-aided planting and restocking were relatively small (less than one thousand hectares annually), and it has been assumed that all of this area is broadleaves. Small estimates for broadleaved new planting without grant aid in Scotland in 2016-17 to 2019-20 have also been included. No estimates have been included for restocking of Sitka spruce in Scotland, or for restocking in England, that are no longer supported by grants. It is assumed that there is no non-FS non-grant aided new planting and restocking in Northern Ireland.
The use of natural regeneration in non-clearfell systems may be increasing - particularly for broadleaves in England. These systems are not satisfactorily represented by measuring restocking area within any given year, and so broadleaf regeneration may be under-reported in this release and other statistics.
Forest Research Updated June 2020 Annex: Significant revisions to published statistics
Revisions arising from the National Forest Inventory
2011 edition Initial results from the new National Forest Inventory (NFI), providing revised estimates of woodland area at March 2010, were released in Spring 2011. The 2011 edition of Woodland Area, Planting and Restocking used these initial NFI results, resulting in an upward revision to the total woodland area in 2011 by 227 thousand hectares. This revision was largely a result of the new inventory identifying small areas of woodland not reported in the previous inventory (the 1995-99 National Inventory of Woodland and Trees) and methodology adjustments.
The rebasing of woodland area estimates to use the same definition of woodland as the National Forest Inventory also resulted in an upward revision by 72 thousand hectares to the estimated Forestry Commission (now referred to as Forestry England/Forestry and Land Scotland/Natural Resources Wales) woodland area. This change has also resulted in a revision to the certified woodland area estimates.
2012 edition The methodology used to estimate woodland area was further refined in the 2012 edition of Woodland Area, Planting and Restocking, to take into account additional and updated data from the NFI. Details of the changes and their potential impact on the figures were pre-announced in the Methodology Note: Annual Woodland Area Estimates, available at: www.forestreresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/statistics/about-our-statistics/methodology-and-outputs/.
These further refinements resulted in the following changes:
- very small (less than 0.5%) downwards revisions to the overall woodland area estimates in each country for 2010 and 2011 from those provided in Forestry Statistics 2011 and Forestry Facts & Figures 2011;
- decreases in the conifer woodland area for 2010 and 2011 of 7% for GB (19% in England, 10% in Wales and 2% in Scotland); and
- increases in the broadleaf woodland area for 2010 and 2011 of 8% for GB (8% in England, 12% in Wales and 6% in Scotland).
In addition, revisions to earlier estimates of woodland areas (to produce a consistent time series, enabling comparisons over time) resulted in increases in overall woodland areas for 2009 and earlier years of up to 8% for GB (14% in England, 6% in Wales and 3% in Scotland). As the Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales (and Forest Service) woodland area estimates are also used as the certified woodland areas for the Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland, Natural Resources Wales (and Forest Service), the revisions described above have also led to changes to the estimates for certified woodland area. This has resulted in a 1% increase to the Natural Resources Wales certified woodland area in 2011 and small changes (less than 0.5%) to the Forestry England and Forestry and Land Scotland certified woodland areas. Revisions to certified woodland areas for 2009 and earlier years, to produce a consistent time series, has resulted in increases to the Forestry England, Forestry and Land Scotland, and Natural Resources Wales certified woodland areas of up to 7% for England, 9% for Wales and 8% for Scotland.
2013 edition Woodland area figures for 2012 were revised in June 2013 to take account of further checks on the NFI woodland area map.
The revisions to the woodland area map have resulted in very small (less than 0.3%) revisions upwards to the overall woodland area estimates in England and Wales for 2012 from those provided in Forestry Statistics 2012. For Scotland the revision was larger (0.8% upwards).
2014 edition Woodland area figures for 2010 to 2013 were revised in June 2014 from those provided in Forestry Statistics 2013 as a result of:
- The correction of an error in the estimate of non-FC broadleaved stocked areas in 2011, used in estimating conifer/broadleaf breakdowns of woodland area in Great Britain in 2010 and 2011;
- The use of estimated stocked areas at 2012 (first released in the National Forest Inventory reports 50 year forecast of softwood availability, and 50 year forecast of hardwood availability, on 30 April 2014) to estimate conifer/broadleaf breakdowns of woodland area in Great Britain in 2012 and 2013;
- The revision of the 2013 woodland area to take account of further checks on the National Forest Inventory woodland area map.
Overall, these revisions have resulted in a very minor downwards revision of 2 thousand hectares (less than 0.1%) to the 2013 estimate of UK woodland area from the figure published in Forestry Statistics 2013. This comprised an increase of 12 thousand hectares (+1%) in the UK broadleaf area and a decrease of 14 thousand hectares (-1%) in the UK conifer area.
At a country level, the revisions to 2013 estimates for broadleaf and for conifer areas resulted in changes of -2% to +5%. The woodland area figures for 2010 to 2012 that were published in Forestry Statistics 2013 (by country and by ownership) are unchanged as a result of these revisions.
As a result of the revisions above, the 2013 UK certified area was revised upwards by less than 0.1%.
Further details on the NFI are available at www.forestresearch.gov.uk/tools-and-resources/national-forest-inventory/.
2015 edition Woodland area figures at March 2014 have been revised from those provided in Forestry Statistics 2014 to take account of further checks on the NFI woodland area map. This resulted in very small revisions to the overall woodland area estimates in Wales (-0.2%), Scotland (+0.4%) and the UK (+0.2%).
2016 edition Woodland area figures at March 2015 have been revised from those provided in Forestry Statistics 2015 to take account of updates to the NFI woodland area map. This resulted in very small revisions to the overall woodland area estimates in England (+0.1%).
2017 edition Woodland area figures at March 2016 have been revised from those provided in Forestry Statistics 2016 to take account of updates to the NFI woodland area map. This resulted in very small revisions to the woodland area estimates in England, Wales and Scotland (\<0.3%).
2018 edition Woodland area figures at March 2017 have been revised from those provided in Forestry Statistics 2017 to take account of updates to the NFI woodland area map. This resulted in very small revisions to the woodland area estimates in England, Wales and Scotland (\<0.3%). 2019 edition Woodland area figures at March 2017 and at March 2018 have been revised from those provided in Forestry Statistics 2018 to take account of updates to the NFI woodland area maps for 2017 (final revised map) and 2018 (provisional map). This resulted in very small revisions to the woodland area estimates in England, Wales and Scotland (\<0.3%) for each of these years.
2020 edition Woodland area figures at March 2018 and at March 2019 have been revised from those provided in Forestry Statistics 2019 to take account of updates to the NFI woodland area maps for 2018 (final revised map) and 2019 (provisional map). This resulted in very small revisions to the woodland area estimates in England, Wales and Scotland (\<0.1%) for each of these years.
Other revisions Revisions to planting data for Wales have resulted in changes of up to 150 hectares per year for new planting in 2015-16 to 2018-19 and up to 260 hectares per year for restocking over the same period. These changes were introduced for the 2020 edition of Provisional Woodland Statistics following the addition of further grant schemes that had not been previously covered and revisions to the methodology for reporting on Rural Payments Wales data.
Revisions to new planting and restocking data for 2015-16 and earlier years has resulted in:
- An increase of 0.1 thousand hectares in the new planting area for England, following inclusion of areas of land acquired for planting by the National Forest Company; and
- Increases of 0.2 thousand hectares in 2014-15 and 0.1 thousand hectares in 2015-16 in the restocking areas in Northern Ireland, following revisions to historic data by the NI Forest Service.
The estimate for the area of private sector new planting in England for 2011-12 was revised upwards by 2.4% in June 2015, with the availability of improved data.
Estimates for “other” woodland new planting were revised in June 2014 for 2010-11 to 2012-13 with the availability of improved data. The estimate for 2010-11 was revised upwards by 12%, while revisions for 2011-12 and 2012-13 were each smaller than 0.1%.
For Northern Ireland, FS restocking figures were revised upwards in June 2017 by 0.2 thousand hectares in 2014-15 and 0.1 thousand hectares in 2015-16. FS restocking figures for conifers in Northern Ireland for 2011-12 were revised upwards in June 2013 by 0.4 thousand hectares from those provided in *Forestry Statistics 2012* as a result of changes to the administrative systems.
The introduction of the Northern Ireland Woodland Register has resulted in an upward revision of 17 thousand hectares (19%) in the Northern Ireland woodland area at March 2012 presented in *Forestry Statistics 2012* and *Forestry Facts & Figures 2012* from the figures in *Woodland Area, Planting and Restocking: 2012 Edition*.
Revisions to the 2011-12 new planting and restocking figures have been made to take account of revised planting data for the Forest Service. This has resulted in a decrease of around 0.5 thousand hectares (48%) in the level of restocking in Northern Ireland presented in *Forestry Statistics 2012* and *Forestry Facts & Figures 2012* from the figure previously released.
The figures for non-Forestry Commission new planting in Wales in 2000-01 to 2009-10 were revised upwards between *Forestry Statistics 2010* (table 1.12) and the 2011 edition of *Woodland Area, Planting and Restocking* (and accompanying time series data), by up to 0.1 thousand hectares per year. This amendment was made to include grant aided planting under the Tir Gofal agri-environment scheme, administered by the Welsh Assembly Government. A further revision was made for *Forestry Statistics 2011* (and accompanying time series data), to improve the estimates of new planting in Wales from the Woodland Grant Scheme. This has resulted in changes of between -0.1 and +0.1 thousand hectares per year for non-Forestry Commission new planting in Wales between 2001-02 and 2008-09.
The figures for new planting and restocking by the Forestry Commission in England in 2004-05 were revised upwards in 2006 publications, from 0.0 and 1.6 thousand hectares to 0.1 and 1.8 thousand hectares respectively. Figures for 2004-05 had been reported and published as net area, but were revised to include a standard estimate for integral open space, for consistency with other years and other planting data.
The figures for new planting by the Forestry Commission in England in 2001-02 and 2002-03 were revised upwards between *Forestry Facts & Figures 2003* (table 4) and *Forestry Statistics 2003* (table 1.11), from 0.1 and 0.0 thousand hectares to 0.6 and 0.7 thousand hectares respectively. This amendment was made to correct the figures extracted from administrative systems, which had incorrectly excluded new planting by the Forestry Commission in community forests, which had been recorded separately.
When results from the 1995-99 National Inventory of Woodland and Trees were incorporated in 1999 and 2000, the total woodland area was revised up by 238 thousand hectares, largely as a result of the new inventory identifying areas of broadleaves not reported in previous censuses.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4927-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 11,
"total-input-tokens": 30788,
"total-output-tokens": 5858,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1707,
1
],
[
1707,
4089,
2
],
[
4089,
6374,
3
],
[
6374,
8559,
4
],
[
8559,
11043,
5
],
[
11043,
11714,
6
],
[
11714,
14051,
7
],
[
14051,
16587,
8
],
[
16587,
18122,
9
],
[
18122,
20461,
10
],
[
20461,
23295,
11
]
]
} |
3ba7da0c4efb28be1a515bb63e0e62e3e59af506 | The National Drug Strategy a guide for local partnerships 2008
by Sara McGrail and David MacKintosh What Is... the London Drug Policy Forum (LDPF)?
LDPF is a unique body, funded by the City of London, which works with all who have an interest in reducing the problems associated with drug use. In particular we assist, support and advise policy makers on drug issues affecting the capital, and work with the London boroughs, Drug Action Teams, CDRPs law enforcement agencies, health organisations, drug agencies and government departments to promote good practice relating to education and prevention, commissioning, community safety and improving services for drug users. The LDPF has also undertaken work with ACPO and the EU around synthetic drugs and patterns of use, and has produced materials around drug driving, workplace policies and drug use in the night-time economy which have been quoted as examples of international best practice. ‘Drugs: Protecting Families and Communities’ focuses on building on the successes of the last strategy (and hopefully learning lessons from the stuff that ‘proved more of a challenge’!)
As this strategy has a much greater focus on local decision making and planning than its predecessor, we were hoping to do something a bit different with how we presented stuff this time.
In each of the previous guides, we’ve begun our section of organisations and people with a description of the central government departments and worked our way down through regional government until we got to the Drug Action Team (DAT) and the local community.
This time round we were hoping to start out at the level of the community and then explore the organisations and departments in regional and central government who are there to help us to meet local need.
Sadly its still too tricky to visualise the Drug Strategy as ground-level up. However, the signs are there that this is what the Government intends to achieve, and so we’re keeping our fingers crossed that next time round we can turn the world on its head.
This then is the third – and still top-down - edition of The National Drug Strategy a guide for local partnerships. Whether you are a DAT Coordinator, a Joint Commissioning Manager (JCM), a Community Safety Manager, or in related areas, we hope you will find this guide makes your job easier to do and takes away some of the headaches.
One of the headaches we had in pulling this together was working out what to call you all. On the assumption that a DAT by any other name would smell as sweet, we have elected to refer to the range of local partnerships that work specifically around drugs - DATs, DAATs, DARTs – as DATs. When we make reference to Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) we refer to the most senior local partnership – the one that takes responsibility with the local authority for the Local Area Agreement (LAA).
Later this year we will also be publishing a shortened version of this guide (Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Local Drug Policy But Were Afraid To Ask) to help members of the community and people who aren’t drug specialists gain a greater understanding of the challenges and opportunities effective drug strategy can bring. We hope these two publications together will help you strengthen commitment across all your local partner agencies to tackling the local challenges you face around drugs in your area. The Two Minute Guide... (take a deep breath)
In 1985 the Conservative government produced the first national drug strategy – Tackling Drug Misuse, followed in 1995 by Tackling Drugs Together. In 1998 the incoming Labour government produced theirs – Tackling Drugs to Build a Better Britain and then updated it in 2002. In 2008, the government produced a new strategy – Drugs - Protecting Communities and Families.
The strategy contains the vision for the national response to drugs, but the devolved administrations are responsible for developing and delivering drug strategies which meet their particular needs. The rest of this guide refers only to England.
The Home Office has overall ownership of the drug strategy and is responsible for co-ordinating delivery of its constituent strands, which are owned by a number of different departments, including the Ministry of Justice, the Department of Health and the Department for Children, Schools and Families.
Like all areas of policy, drugs is subject to Public Service Agreements (PSAs) – central targets that the Treasury uses to see if government money is being spent effectively. At a local level these public service agreements are monitored by Local Authorities through the use of a set of basic indicators – a kind of handbook of what needs to be accounted for locally in terms of benefits to individuals and the wider community. Government monitors how well local areas are delivering to these indicators and targets through the Regional Government Offices and in the case of drugs treatment through a special health authority called the National Treatment Agency.
Local agencies work in partnership to make sure that the drug strategy is being effectively implemented locally. Some areas do this through a specific group called a Drug Action Team (DAT). Others include the work alongside crime and community safety in the work of the Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs). Through these arrangements, local partnerships:
- Work with the community to identify the key local issues around drug misuse
- Prepare local action plans and strategies to tackle drugs
- Commission treatment and other interventions to help people who have problems with drugs, experience and cause less harm
- Tackle issues around drug supply and crime and disorder related to drug use
- Provide a range of interventions through schools and children’s services that help children and young people deal with drug issues
(You can breathe out now) The National Drug Strategy Protecting Families and Communities
The strategy covers four main areas
- Protecting communities through robust enforcement to tackle drug supply, drug-related crime and anti-social behaviour
- Preventing harm to children, young people and families affected by drug misuse
- Delivering new approaches to drug treatment and social re-integration
- Public information campaigns, communications and community engagement
It comes in two parts. There’s the main document with the details of the four themes and the direction of work over the next 10 years. Then there’s the Action Plan. This contains details of the specific actions Government is committed to in terms of illegal drugs over the next three years. It tells you what the outcome of the work will be and which government departments will be responsible for it. You’d be strongly advised to read it. It can be found at www.drugs.gov.uk/publication-search/drug-strategy/drug-action-plan-2008-2011
What is... all this ‘reduction’ about?
There are three key areas of responsibility for every local drugs partnership. These are:
1. **Harm reduction** – reducing the harm people do to themselves, their families and the community through their use of illegal drugs and alcohol. The key harms this type of work seeks to reduce are: physical (health) harms to the individual and the community e.g. by the provision of needle exchange, community and social harms associated with substance misuse and by the provision of maintenance prescribing.
2. **Demand reduction** – reducing the level of demand for illegal drugs. This refers to initiatives aimed at: preventing people starting to misuse drugs e.g. drug education in schools; programmes of diversionary activity supporting people who are misusing drugs to stop e.g. residential and community detox, rehabilitation, structured day services.
3. **Supply reduction** – reducing the availability of illegal drugs. This will largely focus on criminal justice agencies’ work to: prevent drugs being traded or distributed and prevent drugs being produced in, or entering, the UK. Underpinning Ideas Many of the core themes of the last strategies appear again in the current one. The acceptance of the critical role of treatment, supply side interventions and drug education in meeting the needs of communities and individuals and the underpinning philosophies of Harm, Demand and Supply Reduction are all in evidence.
One of the most challenging aspects of this strategy are the new concepts, themes and ideas the government wants to explore over the next three years. Personalisation, new styles of commissioning, mainstreaming and localism all play their part in bringing DATs to the top of the agenda.
The shift to a more individualised (and hopefully in time personalised) approach is really rooted less in the discovery of a human heart beating there at the centre of government, than in the need to achieve better community level and individual outcomes with the money that is being invested in the drug strategy and particularly in treatment.
What is... Personalisation, Self Directed Support and Individualisation?
| Personalisation or Self Directed Support are terms that relate to the reworking of social care interventions to ensure that the service user is in control of what services they receive, how they receive them and who provides them. Sometimes people confuse this idea with Individual Budgets and Individualisation, but they are not the same thing at all. Individual budgets give us a different way of distributing resources that can be an important tool for self directed support. Individualisation simply means tailoring services to individual need – requiring an element of self direction but not necessarily putting the service user in control. | |---| | Because of the way Personalisation has developed in other fields – like mental health – the focus is on the social care or reintegrative support that service users receive. Some of the work being done however is now looking more closely at how Personalisation or Individualisation may work in healthcare. In drug treatment there is no clear definition of how Personalisation or Individualisation might work. However as we write in the summer of 2008 this is a hot topic and lots of people are having a poke about in it (including the Cabinet Office and the RSA). If you want to know more have a look at the work of InControl www.in-control.org.uk | Although there is still a big clinical treatment component, the focus of the work has shifted. Reintegration, housing, training, employment and education are high priorities. Treatment is seen as a route back into the community, a way of ensuring that people who have experienced problems can access re-integrative support from mainstream services (and stop causing trouble). It’s been accepted that housing and training and employment bring benefits and support recovery from early on in someone’s treatment journey and shouldn’t just be stuck on the end like a lollypop at the end of a visit to the dentist.
### What is... Recovery?
Many people in the drugs field and the NTA have begun to use the concept of recovery to describe the optimum outcome of treatment and interventions for drug users. (This is a broader term than ‘recovery’ when used in the USA.) Recovery – both Abstinent and Medication Supported Recovery (aka maintenance or substitute prescribing) is a term that’s going to play a big part in service development over the next few years. Recovery Capital is the physical, psychological and social resources available to an individual to help them move towards recovery.
Happening alongside this new focus on individual outcomes, is another revolution which has begun outside the drugs field and the world of DATs but is coming our way. The drive for localism and mainstreaming grew out of concerns that British public service provision was siloed, bureaucratic, overly centralized and that this made services less cost effective in meeting the needs of communities than it could be.
### What is... Mainstreaming?
Mainstreaming has two related but slightly separate meanings – a bit like two sides of the same coin.
First of all, Mainstreaming is the systematic consideration of the particular needs of a community in relation to drug use in all areas of policy and social provision rather than simply looking at drugs in isolation and delivering services in a silo.
What this means in practice is that mainstream services like primary care, housing services, education and regular social care would be expected to take account of drug use and the needs of people and communities affected by drug use in all their work. Equality of access and opportunity is the goal for communities and individuals. Mainstreaming is a process that aims to achieve that goal.
The other meaning of Mainstreaming is the removal of the ringfence from around a pot of funding to enable services to be delivered more effectively from within mainstream services utilising all resources available. Localism suggests that more decisions about service provision and strategy should be taken locally – not just by local government and local partnerships but by communities and individuals. The speed with which this will impact on drug strategy is not clear at the moment.
A Policy Framework – How Does This All Fit Together? The policy framework for the strategy includes the three year Action Plan, the Public Service Agreements (PSAs) and the 198 Indicators within the local government framework. When we look at the three year Action Plan, what we can see is that there’s a really challenging agenda ahead. Covering all the areas of the Strategy, the action plan will take us up to the next Spending Review and the next set of Public Service Agreements.
What is... the Spending Review?/What is... a Public Service Agreement (PSA)? The spending review is carried out by the Treasury and sets firm and fixed three-year departmental expenditure limits and, through public service agreements (PSAs), defines the key improvements that the public can expect from these resources. The next spending review is due to take place in 2010 but will be dependent on the timing of the next election. PSAs are an agreement between the Treasury and the Departments who receive public funding. They are there to enable better performance management of public services. A PSA has an overall aim, a set of objectives and a set of targets. Published alongside this information is a Technical Note which explains the methodology for measuring the targets. What are... the PSAs for drugs?
The new PSAs for Drugs are 14 and 25. These PSAs have specific measures about Drugs and Alcohol
**PSA 14 – Increase the Number of Young People on the Path to Success**
The drug specific indicator that fits under this PSA is
NI 115 – Substance Misuse by Young People. This Indicator measures the total number of respondents to the Ofsted Tellus Survey who report frequent use of drugs and/or alcohol.
**PSA 25 – Reduce the Harm Caused by Alcohol and Drugs**
The Indicators that sit under this PSA are
NI 20 – Assault with injury crime rate
This Indicator is largely focussed on alcohol related assault.
NI 38 – Class A Offending Rate
This Indicator will focus on an identified cohort of Class A drug misusers and will track the rate of their offences over the year. This has been deferred until 2009-10
NI 39 – Alcohol related hospital admission rates
NI 40 – Drug Users in Effective Treatment
The number of drug users recorded as being in effective treatment with the proxy for ‘effective’ being 90 days in treatment. Don’t imagine you’re out of the woods if your local partnership hasn’t chosen this as stretch target. In return for the Pooled Treatment Budget you’re signed up to being monitored by the NTA on this one I’m afraid.
NI 41– Perceptions of drunk or rowdy behaviour as a problem - collected via community consultation and once again focussed almost entirely on alcohol use.
NI 42 – Perceptions of drug use or drug dealing as a problem – The percentage collected via community consultation
In addition a number of other PSAs are linked to the strategy. These include
**PSA 8 – Maximise Employment Opportunity for all**
**PSA 13 – Improve children and young people’s safety**
**PSA 23 – Make Communities Safer**
**PSA 24 – Deliver a more effective, transparent and responsive CJS for victims and the public (contains measures relating to DIP)**
**PSA 21 – Build more cohesive, empowered and active communities**
**PSA 16 – Increase the proportion of socially excluded adults in settled accommodation and employment, education and training (at the moment only defines ex offenders, people with learning disabilities, care leavers and adults in contact with secondary mental health services as the vulnerable people for whom reintegration should be measured)**
**PSA 18 – Promote better health and well being for all** The Drugs Public Service Agreements Alcohol is now included in the PSAs – in fact some of the measures within them are only or mainly relevant to alcohol.
PSAs also now work differently to the way they used to. The direct link up between the PSA and the work of the local partnership is much more explicit and much stronger than ever before.
Under the PSA’s is a framework of indicators which include the Local Government Indicators agreed between the government and the Local Government Association. The Local Government Indicators were negotiated between the DCLG and the LGA in the summer of 2007. They are directly linked and referenced to the PSAs – creating that loop between central and local government that’s critical for accountability within a localist structure.
Woven into this are two other sets of indicators. There are Vital Signs, the DoH performance framework for health and the Assessments of Policing and Community Safety (APACS) indicators. For convenience we have covered these in more detail on our section on Local Indicators, Vital Signs, APACS and Drugs - Making it Work Locally. What this means is that they get their LAA money (known as the Area Based Grant) plus the additional money they bring to this work and agree to spend the bulk of it on making sure they do better at the targets they’ve chosen (more of this later).
So who’s going to implement all this? Well you are of course. You’re not completely on your own though – there’s any number of people you’re going to need to work with, and for, (and – unfortunately, sometimes, around!) if you’re going to get to grips with your local drugs problem. But lets start out at the top… National Government Departments and their Responsibilities
The **Home Office** (HO) takes the lead in driving forward the Drugs Strategy and meeting the PSAs, but responsibility for implementation is shared between several departments, including the Home Office, Department of Health and the Department for Children, Schools and Families. Home Office specific responsibilities include the Drug Interventions Programme (DIP) and enforcement and availability.
The **Department of Health** (DH) is responsible for the effective treatment target inside PSA 25. It manages this partly via the National Treatment Agency and partly with Primary Care Trusts and Strategic Health Authorities through ‘Vital Signs’. Drug misuse also features as one of the public health priorities for the Department.
In 2007 it published an action plan, Reducing Drug Related Death, which detailed activities including a public health campaign, enhanced monitoring of blood borne viruses and injecting use and peer led initiatives to promote safer practice.
The **Ministry of Justice** (MoJ) and DH share responsibility for one of the fastest expanding areas of the new drug strategy – Prisons. The 2008 strategy places a great deal of emphasis (and the only new resources) on improving drug treatment and support for recovery and reintegration in prisons. There is obviously significant overlap between the role of the Home Office and the MoJ around DIP and offender management. Some rationalisation of the central infrastructure looking at prolific and priority offenders and drug related offenders has taken place within the Home Office. How, or if, this may transfer to the MoJ or NOMs in due course is not yet clear.
**What is... The Drug Interventions Programme (DIP)?**
The Drug Interventions Programme (DIP), is a separately funded programme of work delivering to the criminal justice performance measure of the PSA. Its main focus is in providing enhanced case management and rapid, seamless access to treatment, support and aftercare for all drug using offenders. Areas that have higher crime rates are DIP Intensive Areas – this means they got extra money and could deploy measures within ‘Tough Choices’ such as test on arrest and required assessment.
From 2008 while DIP is being maintained, any areas seeking intensive DIP status will need to fund these developments themselves. The Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) is responsible for ensuring that the new substance use PSA targets are reflected in the planning and performance management of Local Strategic Partnerships.
CLG is also responsible for making sure that Local Area Agreements (LAAs) do ‘what they say on the tin’ and genuinely enhance service delivery through effective partnership, revitalising local democracy and enabling people to have a real say.
The Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) is responsible for ensuring that substance use is recognised in the holistic support of young people by Children’s Trusts – including responsibility for the provision of adequate drugs education, diversionary activity, harm reduction interventions and treatment interventions (in partnership with the NTA). The approach to young people’s work identified in the 2008 strategy builds on this into what is a fully mainstreamed approach.
Other Government Departments Within the new strategy there is quite a bit of room for other parts of Whitehall to get involved. Both the Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) and the Department for International Development (DFID) have a role in representing the UK’s interests in international drugs work. The Treasury as ever will be monitoring how much it all costs and if its any good. The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) have a role in helping deliver the reintegration agenda given their imperative to reduce the numbers on benefits. Enforcement and Availability – National Bodies
The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) (www.acpo.police.uk) is an independent body that represent the most senior officers within the police service. It works with central government and the Association of Police Authorities. ACPO leads and co-ordinates the development of the police service in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It has had an important role in drug policy development and produced the national guidance on the policing of cannabis.
The Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) takes a UK wide approach to improving co-ordination and bringing pressure to bear on organised crime. SOCA identifies drug trafficking in heroin and cocaine – particularly crack cocaine as the greatest single threat to the UK in terms of the scale of serious organised criminal involvement, the illegal proceeds secured and the overall harm caused. SOCA is also a key agency in improving the seizure of criminal assets – for which the new strategy set an ambitious target of £250m per year by 2009/10. SOCA’s stated priorities include working with partners within the UK and internationally to reduce harm.
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) enforces border security and as such has an important role in seeking to stop drugs coming into the UK. Most of the investigation functions from HM Customs and Excise have transferred to SOCA, but Revenue and Customs remain a key agency in dealing with drug dealing. National Specialist Agencies and Departments
The National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse (NTA) was established in 2000 as a Special Health Authority to ensure delivery to the treatment strand of the Drug Strategy. It is sponsored by the Department of Health and they manage its performance via a service level agreement.
The current functions of the NTA include:
- performance management of the treatment planning process
- effective performance management of DIP
- development of effective policy to support treatment (clinical standards, creation of evidence base)
- inspection of treatment services (with the Healthcare Commission for the next year)
- monitoring of the effectiveness of treatment
- monitoring of specialist treatment for young people.
While the NTA's head office is based in London, they have teams in each of the English regions – these are co-located with the Government Office Drugs Teams in the Government Offices for the Regions. There will be an imperative over the life of this strategy for NTA regional teams to work very closely with the regional SHAs.
The Crime and Drug Strategy Unit (CDSU) is the section of the Home Office responsible for drugs – not just in terms of treatment, but also availability, organised crime and young people (jointly with NTA/DCSF). CDSD currently:
- co-ordinates activity across the drug strategy;
- is responsible for the overall monitoring and delivery of the Drug Strategy;
- has lead responsibility for legislation and for enforcement activity;
- delivers cross-cutting work and other projects.
The National Offender Management Service (NOMS) is part of the MoJ. NOMS replaced Probation as the body who manage punishment, rehabilitation and supervision of convicted offender in the community. NOMS structure differs from that of the old Probation service in that it describes its role as being a commissioner rather than a provider of services. The Probation Service will continue to provide services and manage offenders, however its work will be increasingly opened up to competitive tender through commissioning by the NOMS Regional Offender Managers (NOMROMs). The Youth Justice Board (YJB) oversees the youth justice system in England and Wales – managing the performance of the YOTs. Their role is to prevent offending and reoffending by children and young people under the age of 18, and to ensure that custody for them is safe, secure, and addresses the causes of their offending behaviour.
The Healthcare Commission is the health watchdog for England. Its job is to promote improvements in the quality of healthcare and public health. They are responsible for assessing and reporting on the performance of both NHS and independent healthcare organisations, to ensure that they are providing a high standard of care. In partnership with the NTA they undertake a programme of inspection and service improvement.
The Commission for Social Care Improvement is the government inspectorate for social care services (this includes many drug rehabilitation centres). CSCI regulate the private, voluntary and state social care sector. Sometime between late 2008 and spring 2009 the Healthcare Commission and the Commission for Social Care Inspection (along with the Mental Health Act Commission) will be merging to form one new cross-cutting inspectorate. The roles of the inspectorates have been increasing in importance as a result of the need for regulation of the new markets emerging from the wider health and social care reform agenda.
What’s this about... Health and Social Care Reform?
The UK health and social care system has been undergoing radical reform over the past few years. The aim of this has been to improve outcomes for patients and consumers by putting them at the centre of the system.
The key mechanism for this in healthcare has been anticipated as being the establishment of a plural market (one with a number of providers) for healthcare where the consumer has a choice and the provider is paid for the numbers of individuals that they see and the outcomes they achieve. In social care, the focus has also been on the individual service user as an empowered purchaser at the centre of a system of care with multiple providers (see Personalisation).
The greatest impact this has had so far in the drugs field has been in establishing the principle of the plural market – with most DATs having gone through multiple procurement processes. However as yet the position of the commissioner and the state as the arbiter of quality and appropriateness has not been superseded by the principle of individual choice. It remains to be seen how any reductions in funding will impact on this style of market management. Regional Agencies
The Government Offices for the Regions (GORs) are intended to bring implementation and decision-making closer to ‘the people’.
There are 9 Government Offices in England – South East (GOSE), London (GOL), South West (GOSW), East (GOE), East Midlands (GOEM), West Midlands (GOWM), Northwest (GONW), Yorkshire and Humberside (GOYH), and North East (GONE). Each Regional Government Office is organised slightly differently. However, the structure of the teams dealing with drugs and crime are broadly similar across the board.
Each Government Office has a Home Office Regional Deputy Director who is responsible for working with local partnerships - CDRPs, Youth Offending Teams (YOTs), LSPs, DATs - to develop and implement effective crime and drug reduction strategies. Within the unit managed by the Regional Crime Director are the Crime Reduction Advisers and the Drugs Advisers (also known as the Government Office Drugs Team).
Alongside, inside, or surrounding these advisers are the NTA regional team featuring anything from 1 to 9 Deputy Regional Managers, the Regional Administrator, some data/information officers and the Regional Manager.
The Government Offices have a particular responsibility for negotiating and performance managing the local performance targets in the Local Area Agreements (LAAs).
**Directors of Children and Learners.** A recent development in Government Offices is the consolidation of Young People and education agendas in the new roles of Directors of Children and Learners accountable to the DCFS.
The **NOMS Regional Offices** (NOMROs) and **Regional Offender Managers** (NOMROMs) are the individuals charged with commissioning the services for punishment, rehabilitation and supervision in the community and in prisons. They have been charged with producing Reducing Reoffending Plans for each region – however this area of work is currently subject to an ongoing consultation (due to report mid 2008). NOMROs map to the Government Offices for the Regions.
The **Youth Justice Board** (YJB) Regional Teams map onto the nine government office areas. The YJB regional Teams monitor the performance of YOTs through the YOT Performance Framework (and the National Standards for Youth Justice) and help them improve where necessary. **Strategic Health Authorities** (SHAs) are the regional presence of the Department of Health charged with the fiscal and strategic management of health provision in each of the regions.
The 10 SHAs oversee all the NHS bodies in their areas (except Foundation Trusts) including Hospital Trusts, Ambulance Services Trusts, Care Trusts, Mental Health Trusts but the relationship which is arguably their most critical is that with the Primary Care Trusts (PCT).
Strategic Health Authorities manage the Pooled Treatment Budget insofar as they receive the money from Department of Health and distribute it according to the agreed local allocations to the PCT. In real terms, their involvement with drug treatment or strategy has been minimal – however there are signs that this is improving with SHAs ‘upping their game’ across a range of strategic health issues including drugs.
**Public Health Observatories** (PHOs) are tasked with supporting PCTs, local government and local strategic partnerships with information and analysis to enable effective local health strategies to be put in place.
There are nine PHOs in England, which map to the Government Office areas. In most areas PHOs hold the contract for production and analysis of National Drug Treatment Monitoring System (NDTMS) data – the exception to this is London. Police Authorities
As the Police Service operates at county/regional and municipal levels so all areas have a local police authority. Police Authorities are comprised of members drawn from local authorities, magistrates, plus independent members.
Police Authorities have an important role in setting policy for their respective police services, in holding the police to account for their activities (scrutiny) and in consulting with the public.
Their role and interest around drug issues varies across the country, but they are an important partner in establishing local policies and practice – so it might be worth talking to your local members have a look on your local police force or police authority website to find out who they are.
Local Criminal Justice Board
LCJBs were first set up in 2003. Broadly speaking they cover county areas – there are 38 altogether in England. The Court Service, the Crown Prosecution Service, the Police, the Prison Service, the National Probation Service, National Offender Management Service and YOTs are all members of LCJBs. Each LCJB has a ‘liaison’ judge, with whom they work closely. Their key interest in the effective operation of the Criminal Justice System. Thus far their impact on drug issues has been marginal, however, should DIP shift further towards the Ministry of Justice, potentially their involvement could become greater. Non Governmental National Bodies
**Alcohol Concern** ([www.alcoholconcern.org.uk](http://www.alcoholconcern.org.uk)) provide information and encourage debate on the wide range of public policy issues affected by alcohol; including public health, housing, children and families, crime and licensing. They support specialist and non-specialist service providers helping to tackle alcohol problems at a local level, whilst also working to influence national alcohol policy.
**Adfam** ([www.adfam.org.uk](http://www.adfam.org.uk)) are the national charity representing and working with families affected by substance misuse. They provide direct services and also seek to influence policy particularly as it affects children and parents.
**The Alliance** ([www.m-alliance.org.uk](http://www.m-alliance.org.uk)) is a user led organisation which provides advocacy, training and helpline services to those currently in drug treatment, those who have accessed drug treatment in the past and those who may access drug treatment in the future. (weblinks)
**European Association for the Treatment of Addiction** ([www.eata.org.uk](http://www.eata.org.uk)) is an umbrella organisation for the independent drug and alcohol treatment and aftercare sector. EATA is a membership organisation representing 500 services provided by its members in the UK and Internationally.
**Narcotics Anonymous** ([www.ukna.org](http://www.ukna.org)) is a national network of self help groups or fellowships who believe that the cornerstones of recovery is in the therapeutic value of addicts working with each other to achieve recovery through local groups. In meetings members regularly share their personal experiences with each other, providing support and advice.
**DrugScope** ([www.drugscope.org.uk](http://www.drugscope.org.uk)) is a UK charity focussing on substance use. They provide drug information, promote effective responses to drug taking, undertake research at local, national and international levels, advise on policy-making, encourage debate and represent a broad group of organisations in the drugs field.
**United Kingdom Drug Policy Commission** ([www.ukdpc.org.uk](http://www.ukdpc.org.uk)) is an independant body providing academic analysis of UK drug policy. Their aim is to improve political, media and public understanding of drug policy issues and the options for an effective (evidence-led) response to the problems caused by illegal drugs. Local Partnerships Working Around Drugs
Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs) Since the Police Reform Act 2002 (amending The Crime and Disorder Act 1998) all local authorities are statutorily bound to have a partnership, The Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP) which is responsible for:
• carrying out a review of the level and patterns of crime and disorder and drug misuse and • formulating and implementing a strategy for the reduction of crime and disorder and for combating drug misuse and • submitting an annual report on implementation of their strategies
The Police and Justice Act 2006 set off a process of reform of CDRPs, more firmly placing them within Local Strategic Partnerships (LSP). Critically, Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act was strengthened giving LSPs a responsibility for mainstreaming drugs, crime and antisocial behaviour in all of their work.
However onerous this set of new planning requirements might seem, its actually very similar to the structure that was in place in 2001/2 – and may provide you with some real opportunities to get a truly linked up local drugs strategy. You might also be able to use this to help your CDRP engage more effectively with their public health and NHS members.
A new National Standards Framework for local partnerships was published in late 2007. This identified key activities for which the CDRPs would have statutory responsibility focused on drugs, crime and anti social behaviour. Through this framework the LSPs and central government are able to assess the performance and capacity of their CDRP. The framework is built around what are called the ‘Hallmarks of Effective Partnership’. Each Hallmark is made up of statutory duties and good practice guidance.
The six key ways identified for CDRPs to work essentially boils down to good management, a good understanding of the local situation, community engagement and accountability. A new requirement is that county wide authorities must now also have a strategy group and an assessment and plan – as well as this being delivered at district level.
Depersonalised information sharing is a statutory duty of all partners and a protocol to the effect must be agreed.
There is a requirement for an annual consultation with the community and in addition to this CDRPs are required to have at least one ‘Face the People’ style meeting per year in which senior people from all responsible authorities are present.
However, partnership performance will likely be centrally assessed through the Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA) and against PSA 23 which reinforces the importance of local community perceptions of crime and disorder. The new Home Office performance framework Assessment of Policing and Community Safety (APACS) is also likely to play a significant role in enabling both the public and government to understand more about the effectiveness of CDRPS and the constituent agencies. We have covered this in more detail in our section on Local Indicators, Vital Signs, APACS and Drugs – Making it Work Locally.
**DATs and Other Local Drug Partnerships**
In some areas, drugs issues are dealt with entirely through the Crime and Disorder Partnership (CDRP). In other areas, the Drug Action Team (DAT) leads on drug issues. Often the DAT is subordinate to the CDRP, but in some areas the DAT is a freestanding body. In some areas where alcohol is dealt with by the DAT as well as illicit drug use, the Drug Action Team is known as the Drug and Alcohol Action Team (DAAT).
DATs have representatives from most of the responsible authorities (LA, PCT, Police etc) with the addition often of HM Revenue & Customs and Local Drug Treatment providers. In non-unitary authorities the DAT is often located at county level – and will now be able to link more effectively with the new county level CDRP strategy groups. Over the past couple of years it's become more apparent that when people talk about ‘The DAT’ they mean the people who work in jobs that have the word DAT in the name. This is actually wrong. The DAT is the partnership group, the meeting of the great and hopefully good, who link up drug strategy in an area. The Co-ordinator and the Joint Commissioning Manager (JCM) are not the DAT – they work for it.
The responsible local partnership (whether it’s a DAT or a CDRP) will deal with issues right across the Drug Strategy. This will include:
**Supply side interventions** – how close you get to integrating these locally will depend on how good you’ve been at getting your local police to play ball – and for that matter how your local police are set up to deal with drug issues. It’ll help if you’ve got a strong CDRP – but its notoriously difficult to get the right level of representation at the DAT and JCG from the people in blue. Seeking to develop the right contacts here can pay major dividends.
**Treatment** – Inevitably because of the current emphasis on demand reduction strategies, and because of the overall balance of drugs spending, a large part of any local partnership’s workload is currently around the commissioning of drug treatment against the Pooled Treatment Budget (PTB) - a cross departmental central government funding stream for drug treatment which replaced separate drugs budgets for local agencies like Police, Local Authority and Probation.
Few CDRPs or even DATs have the capacity themselves for commissioning and contracting and so it is generally done on their behalf by the local Primary Care Trust (PCT).
Often the PCT themselves will subcontract the contracting part of the deal down to one of the acute or provider trusts. When this is the case you need to ensure that performance is still actively managed – making a strong link between the cash and the delivery is important. This is where the potential is strongest for drug service delivery to get lost in aggregated mainstream contracts – particularly with Mental Health and Foundation Trusts.
The DAT’s work includes commissioning and managing not just treatment in the community but if you’ve got a prison or a YOI on your patch, treatment inside too. And this goes double if your local nick is part of the Integrated Drug Treatment System (IDTS). In addition to what we have come to think of as core treatment, the latest reports on levels of drug related deaths and blood born viruses mean that looking at basic harm reduction services should be of increasing importance nationally and locally – inside and out. What’s all this about… treatment in prisons?
In 2005 the responsibility for healthcare inside prisons passed from the Home Office to the local PCT. At around the same time, many people working in DIP observed that drug interventions and particularly treatment simply weren’t a reality in many if not most prisons. The IDTS was set up with the express intention of ensuring that an increased range of treatment options integrated within one system, meeting the standards of care outside prisons be established for all prisoners experiencing problems with substance use. A very important aspect of IDTS is the way it has sought to link up treatment inside and outside prison.
The Cross Cutting Agenda – when DATs were first set up a key part of their work was seen as joining local responses together. To an extent the emphasis on criminal justice interventions and structured treatment has seen some of this work put on the back burner. With the recognition that dealing with the impact of problematic drug use is about more than this comes the need for DATs to make sure that all the local players are:
- round the table
- contributing (practically and financially)
- accountable for their delivery
See page 42 for some ideas on how you might want to ‘lever in’ in resources and support. This needs to translate into real opportunities to improve things for people and communities affected by problematic drug use. So for housing services it might mean supporting people to retain tenancies rather than eviction or for education providing additional support to families or schools.
Children, Young People and Families – This is about ensuring your Children and Young People’s Strategic Partnership or Children’s Trust is taking proper account of drug issues in its strategy, policy, planning and service delivery (i.e. making sure that ‘mainstreamed’ hasn’t come to mean ‘disappeared leaving this here pool of money…’)
Community Liaison – With the emphasis back on community consultation and engagement a big part of a DAT’s work over the next few years is likely to involve working with your local communities and community groups. The new strategy places an increased emphasis on working with the community and the families of people experiencing problems with drugs. You might find it useful to link up with family and community support agencies in your area to make sure that they are ‘mainstreaming’ drugs in what they do and are aware of the services you are commissioning and developing.
Please see section on Community Consultation on page 44 What is… a Good DAT?
The CDRP Hallmarks for effective practice go some way towards defining how a good local partnership working to tackle drugs issues should look. However these only really go as far as the crime and disorder side of the DATs work – and there’s a lot more that needs to go on.
Here are some tips from us about how a good DAT might look:
A Good DAT...
• has effective, informed enthusiastic senior level representation from the range of agencies that deal with drug issues locally. The members of a good DAT don’t just dump everything on the DAT co-ordinator – they get involved.
• is about more than crime and treatment – its role is to co-ordinate treatment, availability/supply side interventions, community, young peoples interventions and local strategy in areas such as housing, regeneration, education and environment to ensure the best joined up responses to drug problems for your area
• understands the local drug problem – from the circumstances of its drug markets to the level of blood borne viruses
• recognises it cannot just wait for the government to tell it what to do but is never caught out when the NTA calls them to their quarterly review
• has a strong joint commissioning group (JCG) that involves all relevant agencies in decision making about provision.
• delegates power to commission services to its Joint Commissioning Group but it performance manages that work – and keeps an eye on service provision itself
• has an effective information function – so it can keep up to date on progress
• plans and implements a realistic programme of activities and a range of services which addresses local needs while responding to the demands of central government and regulators
• ensures the DAT links into other local strategic partnerships – particularly the LSP and community forums and consultation groups.
• communicates with its stakeholders, the community and Government
A Good DAT meeting…
• does not go on for 6 hours, leaving everybody looking like they’ve been 10 rounds with the Beast of Bodmin, not understanding a word that’s been said since the coffee break.
• has a clear brief meaningful agenda that everyone can take part in
• uses its membership to take a 360 degree view of issues
• is held regularly – and at least quarterly
• makes decisions! Most Local Drugs Partnerships nominate one of their constituent bodies as the budget holder for the PTB. They will also establish a Joint Commissioning Group (with budget holding representatives of all the agencies), supported by a Joint Commissioning Manager who will manage the process on their behalf. This post holder (and it could be you!) will usually be employed within an integrated commissioning team housed in either the Local Authority or the PCT.
**Joint Commissioning Groups**
In most areas a Joint Commissioning group takes delegated responsibility from the senior officers attending the CDRP/DAT to commission drug treatment on their behalf.
Treatment should be commissioned in response to local need and in line with Models of Care (2002 + 2005).
Treatment commissioning is like the commissioning of any kind of service. You’re trying to find out what’s needed, and how you can get it cheapest at the best quality and you want to make sure that they keep providing it well and that it keeps doing what you need it to do.
______________________________________________________________________
**What is... ‘Models of Care’ (MoC)?**
Models of Care and its 2005 update is an ‘evidence-based’ strategy setting out national standards of care that drug users can expect to receive from treatment providers.
The framework of Models of Care comprises definitions of four tiers of treatment, integrated care pathways through them, care planning and co-ordination and monitoring.
The four tiers of treatment identified in Models of Care are:
- **Tier 1**: Non substance-misuse specific services requiring interface with drug and alcohol treatment
- **Tier 2**: Open access drug and alcohol treatment services
- **Tier 3**: Structured community-based drug treatment services
- **Tier 4**: Residential services for drug and alcohol misusers If it stops working well, you need to take a look at what’s happening and maybe if it doesn’t fit your needs anymore, go out and buy something different. Sometimes though, it’s better to do a bit of work to get it to fit your needs rather than simply chuck it out and start again.
That’s what’s called the commissioning cycle. It’s not rocket science but it does require you to have a good needs assessment – and an ongoing evolutionary, developing understanding of what’s going on in your patch both in the services you commission and in the world of the people who use them. You also need to be up to date on best practice in the types of services you commission and the needs they meet. People were thrilled when the penny farthing came out, but no one’s going to ride to work on one today…
Bluffers guide to the commissioning cycle
- What’s needed?
- Is it working?
- How will we do it?
- What are we going to buy?
- What’s going on?
- Who are we going to buy from and how? Youth Offending Teams (YOTs)
YOTs were established by the 1998 Criminal and Disorder Act. Prior to this, most Youth Justice issues were dealt with by departments with Local Authorities – usually located in Social Services. The YOT is a multi agency team (made up of probation staff, social services staff, healthcare workers, education workers, drug and alcohol services, police and housing officers) charged with tackling all aspects of youth crime and disorder including prevention of offending and re-offending, supervision of offenders and resettlement of young offenders leaving custody if they are under the age of 16.
The YOT identifies the needs of each young offender through a formal assessment. The YOT worker responsible will work with the young person and their parents to identify the specific issues that make the young person offend as well as measuring the risk they pose to others. The YOT team will identify suitable programmes to address the needs of the young person to help them stop offending.
YOTs are key partners in Children’s Trusts. YOTs are inspected on a 5 year rolling programme by a Joint Inspectorate lead by HMI Probation and including Healthcare Commission, HM Inspectorate of Constabulary, HM Inspectorate of Prisons, HM Inspectorate of Probation, Office for Standards in Education. YOTs are performance managed by the Youth Justice Board (YJB). Drugs are a big issue for many YOTs and your DAT’s partnership with your local YOT should be ongoing and a priority. Local Police Structures
Organisation of the police on a local or borough level varies enormously across England. Check out with the community liaison team at your local nick what structure applies in your area. Most areas no longer have a drug squad – with drugs being seen as part of mainstream policing. Different police forces prioritise different levels of drug crime – according to local circumstances.
All police areas are now committed to working in partnership – however in reality what this means is different from area to area. Remember drugs is not always a local policing priority however the Police are often very keen to work supportively around treatment, harm reduction and co-ordinated intervention with you and your DAT. Local police involvement is essential to any partnership. The right working relationships will help you influence and keep you involved in what happens at borough/basic command unit level (BCU).
What is… a BCU?
Usefully, it depends on where you are. In some areas a BCU is a Basic Command Unit – this is the usual model for shires (but not always). A Basic Command Unit is often led by a Chief Superintendent reporting to a Chief Constable at County or Regional Force level. Most have considerable autonomy to set their own priorities with the boundaries of the Local Policing Plan.
In other areas – mainly metropolitan ones – a BCU is a Borough Command Unit. These are co-terminus with local authority boundaries, and are generally led by a Senior Officer usually a Chief Superintendent or Commander reporting to an even more Senior Officer - usually an Assistant Chief Constable or Deputy Assistant Commissioner.
Both BCUs and – er - BCUs produce an annual policing plan setting out the priorities for the area. These are submitted to the Force command at regional/county level. Safer Neighbourhood Teams (SNT) are an initiative that aims to effectively root local policing within communities. They do provide an opportunity for the public to engage with the local police/community safety officers and there is also scope for communities to help set SNTs priorities, however partnerships will need to ensure that this is based on an accurate and informed understanding of what local problems are.
However well linked you think you are to local policing strategy if your work is not having an impact on neighbourhood policing you’re not making the most of your time or resources. So make sure you both support and challenge the Safer Neighbourhood Teams in your area. Providing training is one way of doing this.
______________________________________________________________________
**What is... this about different levels of drug crime?**
In line with the National Intelligence Model (NIM), police forces categorise and prioritise drug crime at three levels.
- **Level 1** is defined as local crime being dealt within a Basic Command Unit (e.g. street level dealing).
- **Level 2** is crime affecting more than one Basic Command Unit (e.g. cross borough dealing of 1-3 kilos – also referred to as the middle market).
- **Level 3** is serious and organised crime operating on a national or international level (e.g. importation of drugs or moving multi kilos quantities within the country).
Your local force may have a priority to tackle level 1 crime (in terms of its impact on communities) or may be working in partnership with its neighbouring commands or national agencies to deal with serious and organised crime as a priority. You can influence how these priorities are set – but you need to do it with your partners in the Police Authority and CDRP. Local Drug Specific Plans
Needs Assessment is a critical part of the local planning process – and there is guidance available from the NTA about this in terms of treatment and DIP. It is also a big part of the new statutory duties of the CDRP. You may want to combine your treatment needs assessment with your strategic local crime and disorder substance misuse assessment – and if you can, an overview of local community needs (eg around youthwork provision, employment and housing initiatives) into one overall DAT needs assessment.
The Treatment Plan is the annual set of documents you are expected to complete in order to receive the Pooled Treatment Budget. It comes in four sections each of which relate to a function of the commissioning process:
(i) The Strategic Summary – this is where you summarise all the information available around substance use – specifically with regard to treatment - in your area. This very important section of the Treatment Plan enables you to contextualise your commissioning decisions in the light of local need and central imperatives. Within this section you will also be required to set your ambitions for numbers in treatment etc for the year ahead. To deliver a strong section 1 you need a good needs assessment.
(ii) The Self-Assessment Checklist – this is where you have an opportunity to assess your area’s progress against an NTA checklist. This is a really useful exercise if you are new to either your local area, or drug policy. You may wish to fill this in with your DAT or Joint Commissioning Group.
(iii) The Planning Grids – this is where you will detail all your commissioning activity for the year ahead and identify the cost and timescale for each activity.
(iv) The Funding Bit – this is where you detail all the resources – so that’s real money and then the other stuff like secondments, bits on aggregated contracts etc – that support your treatment plan.
What is it about... Ambition Setting?
Ambition Setting is a process you need to go through in order to establish what percentage improvement you will achieve locally in terms of numbers in effective treatment. Although this is an important part of your treatment planning, the picture focus for this exercise is not in fact the NTA though your Deputy Regional Manager will be keenly interested and will show this through ongoing support. This is in fact the target that will sit in your PCT’s, Local Development Plan (LDP) responding to both Vital Signs and Local Government Indicators (NI 40). How these ambitions can be incentivised within the new formula for the Pooled Treatment Budget (see page 33) is yet to be seen. The Treatment Planning Template is released by the NTA in October of each year. A draft is required usually by the first week in January. This draft will go to a regional panel (including senior managers and service users) that will assess it. If it’s believed by the panel that your plan is good and accurate and represents a responsible use of the budget they will approve it at this stage. Otherwise early in March a series of recommended changes will be laid out and you will be required to amend your plan by the start of the new financial year in April.
**Children and Young People Substance Misuse Plans** Local authorities must develop Children and Young People Plans. DATs/CDRPs are expected to jointly agree local priorities and targets around substance use to include in the unitary children’s plan and where appropriate the YOT plan. DATs and partnerships are also expected to produce a specific and separate Young Persons Treatment Plan (backed up by a needs assessment) for the NTA.
**IDTS Plan** Areas with a prison that is part of IDTS are also required to work with the prison and the local partners – specifically the PCT - to produce the IDTS plan.
**Healthcare Commission Inspections** The Healthcare Commission has been working with the NTA on an 3 year programme of inspections – with two themes a year – to which DATs and treatment providers have been required to report. DATs that perform poorly in these inspections may be required to prepare, submit and implement an improvement plan looking at areas of poor performance. This programme is due to end in 2009 – when the HCC become part of a new big ‘super inspectorate’. It remains to be seen how inspection of drug treatment will continue after this – however signs are that the merging of HCC with the CSCI may bring about a more mainstreamed approach to drug service inspection and regulation. Watch this space. Performance management of the treatment elements of the National Strategy are undertaken by the NTA through their regional teams and with reference to NDTMS information (which you are also required to submit to get your paws on the Pooled Treatment Budget). Partnerships have been required to submit returns to the NTA which have identified partnership performance against a range of real output targets and proxy outcome indicators such as retention in treatment and waiting times. However the reliance on proxy outcome indicators will be replaced as TOPS beds in.
The Drug Intervention Programme (DIP) is directly performance managed by the DIP team within the Home Office – but much of the groundwork is undertaken by the NTA. DIP client work is recorded on the Drugs Intervention Record (DIR) which is completed by all the agencies who work with an individual. These records are collated to produce monthly ‘Dashboard Reports’ for every DIP area and service detailing the number of individuals who are assessed, present for treatment and successfully complete treatment. These reports are available via DIRWEB.
What is... NDTMS?
The National Drug Treatment Monitoring System is the system by which data is collected from drug treatment providers about every individual in treatment on a monthly basis. Compliance with making returns has previously been patchy, however the majority of providers and DAT areas now use electronic data transfer (EDT) which is ensuring that the system can provide much more up to date and accurate information.
What is... TOPs?
The Treatment Outcomes Profile (TOPs) is a national system applied to each individual coming into treatment via the care management and assessment process which records the key outcomes of their engagement in treatment across 4 key domains:
- Drug and alcohol use
- Physical and psychological health
- Social functioning
- Offending and criminal involvement
The gathering of this information throughout an individual’s treatment journey should enable a clear national picture of the impact of treatment to emerge. This will in turn enable better understanding of the value for money of the investment by government in this area of public policy and aid the development of individualisation (and hopefully personalisation) of services. They could also help us identify how mainstreaming is working in an area.
TOPs data will be collected via routine returns to NDTMS. What About the Money? Drug Budgets
The Pooled Treatment Budget (PTB) – is a central government funding stream for drug treatment that replaced separate drugs budgets for local agencies like Police, Local Authority and Probation. In 2008 the Pooled Treatment budget was announced as a non-inflation proofed standstill budget with a new allocation formula.
What is... the new formula for the PTB?
There are 4 components to the new formula for PTB allocations.
**Activity** – this is the number of individuals ‘in effective treatment’ which means retained for 12 weeks or more or discharged successfully before 12 weeks. This applies to 75% of the allocation.
**Case Mix** – a step closer to individualisation this part of the formula rests on the calculation that it costs twice as much to provide treatment to a crack or heroin user as it does to provide treatment to someone who uses other drugs. Put simply, this means that you now get twice as much money for people who use crack and heroin as you do for people who use benzo’s, speed or cannabis.
**Caseload Complexity** – 25% of the allocation is determined by factors reflecting the complexity of the local treatment population - using the York Formula as a proxy for caseload complexity. The York Formula is a way of distributing healthcare funding that is based on health inequalities and deprivation (i.e. if the area is more deprived and has higher rates of certain key health indicators, they will receive more money).
**Area Cost Differential** – This is actually the Market Forces Factor (MFF) something developed in healthcare to measure the real difference in cost of providing one type of service in different areas.
In principle although allocations have been published for the years 08/09, 09/10 and 10/11 it has been said that areas who improve their performance will receive more money, though it is unclear where the additional funding will come from if the initial settlement by the Department of Health remains the same. **Area Based Grant (ABG)** is the big pot of funding into which funding streams such as the Safer and Stronger Communities Fund have been mainstreamed. Local Authorities are free to use this funding as they see fit. So DATs need to be making their case heard to get a share.
**Drugs Intervention Programme (DIP) Funding** – All DAT areas receive DIP funding which comes directly from the Home Office to the Local Authority – this is to cover the costs of providing the DIP programme to the required level in your area. As we have already said, there will be no central funding for additional intensive DIP areas. Critical Mainstream Local Partnerships And Plans
Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) are multi-agency bodies which cover local authority areas and bring together at a local level the different parts of the public, private, voluntary and community sectors.
LSPs provide a single local co-ordination framework within which joined up planning for service delivery can take place. LSPs can tackle deep-seated, multi-faceted problems that require a range of responses from different bodies working together.
Don’t expect that drugs and drug related issues will be a large part of your LSP’s discussions. Drugs and even Community Safety are a small part of a very wide agenda that encompasses everything from public transport to school dinners to ambulance services.
One of the main jobs of the LSP is the production and co-ordination of the Sustainable Community Strategy (often called the Community Plan). Its critical that if you are the person who is responsible for drugs strategy, service development and commissioning in your area that you engage with your LSP. If you are not based in the Local Authority find out who the lead for the LSP is in your agency and speak to them about it.
What is the … Sustainable Community Strategy?
Sustainable Communities Strategies are designed to promote or improve the economic, social and environmental well-being of local residents through sustainable development.
They set a long term (up to twenty years) vision for the area, which aims to improve the quality of life of local people and identify local priorities for service delivery.
They include an action plan with shorter-term (1, 2 and 3 years) priorities and activities that will contribute to the achievement of the vision.
The responsibility for developing the Sustainable Community Strategy lies with the Local Authority, but other members of the LSP must work with them to prepare and implement it.
Because it can seem like every man and his dog (Spot) is a member of the LSP nowadays, meetings can be long, tiring and unproductive affairs. LSPs have an awful lot of work to do, so a lot of LSP business will be conducted outside of the main meeting in a sub group. LSPs all have different structures – but the majority will have a number of subgroups covering issues such as
- Children and young people
- Education and skills
- Employment and enterprise
- Housing
- Health
- Transport
- Area based regeneration initiatives
- Community Safety
You need to find out what the subgroup is that is charged with tackling drugs in your area. It may be that the CDRP itself is a subgroup of the LSP – in which case you need to make sure that drugs is well up the CDRP agenda. It may even be that the DAT is a subgroup of the LSP (particularly in some of the shire counties).
It’s likely however that no one group will be responsible for the whole of drugs in your area. The Community Safety Group will be responsible for drugs and crime, but the health group would probably have responsibility for blood born viruses. Young People’s drug issues will almost certainly be dealt with by a young people’s sub group. You might need to work with the housing group to get an issue around housing dealt with.
Your job with the is to get each of the sub groups to recognize and accept their role in tackling local drug problems. You will need to talk to chairs of the sub groups. You will need to show them WHY drugs is a priority issue but also help them understand they can do something about it. One way you can do this is by demonstrating the impact that drug use has on their area of concern. You might want to make sure that whatever needs assessment you undertake locally clearly identifies not just the drug issues of the area in terms of treatment and offending, but also housing, anti-social behaviour, education and healthcare.
**What is... the Concordat?**
| The concordat was negotiated between the Local Government Association (LGA) and the Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) and sets out a new relationship between central government and local government. It’s based on the belief that where ever possible or practical services are best determined and delivered at a local level. The 198 Local Government Indicators are the framework developed to monitor key areas of activity. | |---| | The most important thing about the Concordat is the explicit acceptance on the part of government that the 198 Local Government Indicators will be the sole performance management framework for local government and its partnerships. |
**The Local Area Agreement (LAA)** is the agreement made between local partners and Central Government that makes a reality of the Sustainable Community Strategy. An LAA is a three year agreement that sets out the priorities, targets and outcomes for a local area agreed between Central Government, represented by the Government Office (GO), and a Local Strategic Partnership (LSP). LSPs agree to deliver to a series of Mandatory Outcomes (including targets around Crime and Disorder, Anti-Social Behaviour and Drug Use) and in return they are given the freedom to achieve the agreed outcomes in a way that they define as meeting local needs and circumstances. The targets of the LAA are taken from the Local Government Performance Framework published by the Department for Communities and Local Government. However they also link with (and in many case are coterminous with) the indicators within Vital Signs and APACS.
It works like this. Data is collected about all the indicators – all 198 of them that is. The LAA is made up of stretch targets against these indicators – areas and issues that your local partnership know they need to improve (or areas that government tells them they need to improve!). 17 of these targets are mandatory for all local authorities – and they have mainly to do with education and young people. The local partnership picks up to a further 35 indicators and identifies stretch targets against them.
The Area Based Grant (ABG) and other resources are then spread across these areas and with the additional resources in place and a joined up local agenda in play, the partnership moves towards improvement. Local Indicators, Vital Signs, APACS and Drugs – Making it work locally
Just as the diagram above suggests the local indicators for drugs sit at the convergence of three performance management frameworks. The dominant framework is the Local Government Performance Management Framework (aka the ‘198 Local Indicators’ or the ‘Local Indicators Set’ – or that ‘darn’ list). The drugs indicator that sits within Vital Signs is in this framework, as are the APACS indicators.
So the indicators themselves...
| Number | Measure | Drugs? | Alcohol? | Vital Signs? | APACS? | 198? | |------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|----------|--------------|--------|------| | NI 20 (PSA25) | Assault with injury crime rate | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | | NI 38 (PSA) | Drug-related (Class A) offending rate | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | | NI 39 (PSA25) | Alcohol related hospital admission rates | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | | NI 40 (PSA25) | Drug Users in Effective Treatment (retained for 12 weeks or discharged successfully before this) | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | | NI 41 (PSA25) | Perceptions of drunk or rowdy behaviour as a problem | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | | NI 42 (PSA25) | Perceptions of drug use or drug dealing as a problem | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ | ✔ |
It is not your job to collect all the information for these indicators, however given that you need to monitor them, budget for them, plan services around them and understand them, it might as well be. Remember as well the NTA are going to be monitoring you separately – outside this framework – to make sure that you keep hold of your Pooled Treatment Budget and spend it on the things that central government wants you to spend it on. The status of DIP funding is uncertain at the moment, but its fairly likely to follow a similar path – with the NTA monitoring your activity against the output and process measures defined in the DIP conditions of grant. A number of PSAs are not directly related to drugs measures but reflect issues that are at the very heart of the new strategy – like reintegration, housing, employment, training, community involvement, neighbourhood policing and regeneration.
The lack of measures in the 198 Indicators, APACS or Vital Signs relating to the impact of drugs in these areas is going to make it difficult for you to deliver these elements of the strategy locally. Essentially it could be a tricky for you to monitor progress in these areas in the short term unless you make a case locally for collecting the data yourself – maybe by adapting some of the measures under these PSAs in the local government performance management framework (or the 198 Indicators as its usually known).
What is... Vital Signs?
Vital Signs is the NHS framework for measuring and managing national and local priorities. NHS Organisations use the Vital Signs to develop local operational plans that deliver against national and local priorities. As in other areas of the public sector, central performance management is being limited to a small number of core indicators (tier one national priorities). The drug target from Vital Signs is the same as that in PSA 25 – the numbers of drug users in effective treatment.
What is... APACS?
The Assessments of Policing and Community Safety (APACS) framework was introduced in 2008 and applies to police forces in England and Wales.
It covers key services delivered by the police working on their own or in partnership by establishing indicators of performance eg: ‘Assault with injury’ crimes per 1,000 population (which links to National Indicator 20 within the Local Government Indicator set.) APACS is linked with other local developments, principally the PSAs, The Local Government National Indicator Set (where APACS indicators are embedded) and the Audit Commission’s work on the Comprehensive Area Assessment process.
The APACS indicator set is unfortunately not available in its final form at the time of going to press so specific information is not available. However indications are that it will be in place in the ‘not too distant future’. For example, say your partnership decided what you needed to do locally was really make sure that drug users coming out of treatment were getting access to employment and training. There’s a measure under PSA 16 that will probably work –
**NI 149 Adults in contact with secondary mental health services in employment, training or education.**
You might want to look at the number of adults in employment, training or education who are, or have been, in contact with drug treatment services.
What you need to do is make a case for why this stuff is important. You might want to say “its in the drug strategy and informal signals are that these measures could be in place in the future”. You might even be able to get informal agreement to add in to your next LAA as a voluntary measure.
You might want to talk about the evidence base for reintegration and recovery and how it adds value to treatment spend. However, if you can just get agreement to monitor this – either through your LAA or even just through your DAT, you’ll have made a good start – and your work will benefit by being in an area of effort that your LSP recognises as critical.
Getting money out of the LAA is a tricky business. LSPs may be inclined to spend the bulk of their ABG on meeting the stretch targets. It may be that if your LAA is particularly enlightened or if they have picked the drug treatment or drug related crime indicators as part of their 35, that they will understand that spending on treatment without spending on reintegration, housing and employment is empty investment.
Another way you might work this is by suggesting that the Comprehensive Area Assessment is going to be looking at a much broader range of local activities – including how the partners meet need. Some work to demonstrate the need for reintegration, housing and employment may go a long way.
If your area is going to be in receipt of the Working Neighbourhoods Fund, (replacement for NRF), this might be another way you could make stuff happen.
You need to remember the onus is on local partnerships to do this– no one is going to tell you to do it. Adapting, building, chivvying…
One of the other things you might want to do is look at what indicators your LSP has already chosen and how you could adapt and measure alongside them a range of voluntary local drugs or drug and alcohol targets. If you can agree a set of these as a DAT you may find you’re ahead of the game next time around – and at least you’ll have a baseline. The table below gives you some examples of how you might measure drugs issues alongside these indicators. Please note this list is not exhaustive! Don’t stifle you creativity with this lot – read your LAA and see what you can fit in that reflects local need round drugs. You may find the following a useful crib sheet for meetings with local heads within your Local Authority or PCT. | Indicator | Ideas for DAT Monitoring | |-----------|--------------------------| | **NI 109** Number of Sure Start Children Centres | DCSF DSO(*) Number of SureStart centres providing interventions or signposting around drugs or working with drug misusing parents – helps with your implementation of Hidden Harm | | **NI 111** First time entrants to the Youth Justice System aged 10 – 17 | PSA 14 First time entrants who have been screened for drug misuse problems – this should be 100% | | **NI 118** Take up of formal childcare by low income working families | DWP DSO Take up of childcare by families where drug misuse is a problem – this is a specific target of the new Action Plan | | **NI 119** Self-reported measure of people’s overall health and wellbeing | DH DSO Self reported measure of the health and well being of people in treatment - you could use TOPS for this | | **NI 128** User reported measure of respect and dignity in their treatment | DH DSO* Users reported measure of respect and dignity in drugs treatment - manners do matter | | **NI 140** Fair treatment by local services | PSA 15 Fair treatment by local drug services – maybe a measure that could be looked at in partnership with local advocacy services? | | **NI 152** Working age people on out of work benefits | PSA 8 People in or recently discharged from drug treatment on benefits – fits with the new focus on employment | | **NI 156** Number of households living in Temporary Accommodation | PSA 20 Number of people in or recently discharged from treatment living in temporary accommodation | | **NI 17** Perceptions of anti-social behaviour | PSA 23 Responses to concerns over ASB linked, or stated to be linked, to drug use. |
(\*) DSO’s are Departmental Strategic Objectives and are owned by the Departments indicated
- deferred until 2009-10 | Indicator | Ideas for DAT Monitoring | |-----------|--------------------------| | **NI 18** Adult re-offending rates for those under probation supervision | PSA 23 | DRR reoffending rate anyone? | | **NI 21** Dealing with local concerns about anti-social behaviour and crime by the local council and police | PSA 23 | Dealing with local concerns about drug related ASB and crime by the DAT or other local body | | **NI 28** Knife crime rate | HO DSO | Knife crime where the individual is in possession of or tests positive for a class A substance | | **NI 29** Gun crime rate | PSA 23 | Gun crime where the individual is in possession of or tests positive for a class A substance | | **NI 32** Repeat incidents of domestic violence | PSA 23\* | Repeat incidents of domestic violence where the individual is in possession of or tests positive for a class A substance | | **NI 50** Emotional health of children | PSA 12 | Emotional health of the children of drug misusing parents – important for Hidden harm | | **NI 58** Emotional and behavioural health of children in care | DCSF DSO | Drug use by children in care – a difficult issue in many areas | | **NI 65** Children becoming the subject of a Child Protection Plan for a second or subsequent time | DCSF DSO | Children of drug misusing parents becoming the subject of a Child Protection Plan for a second or subsequent time | | **NI 68** Referrals to children’s social care going on to initial assessment | DCSF DSO | Referrals to children’s social care going on to initial assessment from drug treatment agencies | | **NI 88** Number of Extended Schools | DCSF DSO | Number of extended schools providing drug education/interventions for families | Local priorities need to be set not just by a few people in the town hall sitting down with Government and saying “this is how it is” but be backed up by genuine community consultation and solid needs assessment. In this way we make sure that the activities undertaken in a local area are what people living there need and want. This is the real meaning of localism and is at the centre of the new drug strategy.
What’s all this about ….Community Consultation?
One of the key ways in which LSPs are changing local policy making and service provision is in the requirement placed on them by legislation to consult with their local community to develop and update the community strategies. This consultation may take place differently in each area but it is likely to include
- Public meetings (which anyone can come along to) in community venues including ‘Face the People’ meetings
- Setting up a forum of local people and businesses who can be regularly polled for their views at meetings, by phone or through questionnaires
- Conducting a general household survey
- Inviting organisations and individuals to comment on specific proposals
- Talking directly to groups affected by specific areas of policy
Essentially consultation is as real as the people undertaking it want it to be – but if it’s conducted properly it can really help you understand what’s going on in your local community. Consultation should also help the LSP prioritise their work. You may find people in your area think drugs is a priority even if your LSP doesn’t.
There are some cautions around this however. For example, one of the indicators in the local set is ‘lowered local perceptions of drug use or dealing as a problem’ as a measure of success in dealing with drugs. This might not always be the case. If you set up a new treatment service in an area local people will almost certainly initially at least have a heightened perception of drug use as a problem, so look carefully at the responses you get to consultation and the targets that you grow from it.
This is also where all that data you’ve been collecting can really come in useful, if there’s anything that influences people more than a flourish of semi relevant views it’s a flourish of relevant data. Remember, the information you collect for government may feel like a pain at times, but its your information for you to use to help make the local response stronger and better. So use it, and augment it and think about what it means.
Drugs is a difficult issue for people to deal with in consultations – and it could be useful if you can get involved in the group designing and working on consultation in your area. Drug users and their families are likely to find it difficult to come forward and speak openly about their experiences, so its worth exploring innovative ways in which you can reflect their views and experiences in the work you do. This might not just mean asking people who are in treatment what they think about treatment, but also about housing and education and policing as well. Children’s Trusts From 2008 every local area has had a Children’s Trust including partners from all statutory agencies whose job is to bring together all services for children and young people with focus on improving outcomes for all children and young people. Lots of Children’s Trusts have different structures, but all of them will have:
- A joint needs assessment for young people
- Shared decisions on priorities
- Pooled resources
- Joint commissioning
Children and Young People’s Plans (CYPPs) are a statutory requirement. The CYPP is a single, strategic, overarching plan for all services that affect children and young people in the area, provided by the local authority and all partners. The Local Authority prepares the CYPP jointly with its partners – not just the regular statutory partners like the YOT and the PCT but all organisations working with young people such as colleges, culture, sport and play and recreation organisations, registered social landlords and the voluntary and community sector.
Children’s Trusts are committed to delivering against the five key outcomes defined in ‘Every Child Matters’ – The Government Strategy for Children and Young People published in 2003. This groundbreaking green paper – which became The Children’s Act 2004 established the principle that it is the responsibility of all agencies who work with children and young people to ensure that they have the support to be able to:
- Be healthy
- Stay safe
- Enjoy and achieve
- Make a positive contribution
- Achieve economic well-being
Performance against the five key outcomes for children and young people is assessed through the Annual Performance Assessment (APA) and the Joint Area Review (JAR).
APA focuses on how much council’s services have improved outcomes for children and young people. The APA uses data (with a framework of key indicators) the Children and Young People’s Plan, any reviews of this plan and other supporting information. It’s a desk based exercise and doesn’t involve site visits. The Joint Area Review (JAR) is a three-year programme running until December 2008 and all 150 local authority areas will have one joint area review during this time. It looks at local progress towards the 5 key outcomes but uses a different and more focused methodology including onsite investigative visits, direct consultation with young people, front line workers, parents, elected members and others. Both the APA and the JAR will be incorporated into the Comprehensive Area Assessment from 2009.
Young people’s substance use strategy should be governed by the local Children’s Trust and will need to be fully integrated into local young people’s services. Every Child Matters – the Government Strategy for Children’s Services - has already had a significant impact on the way services dealing with drug and alcohol issues for children and young people are delivered. Instead of setting up specialist services, the focus is on making sure mainstream services and interventions deal with drugs as part of the range of issues facing young people. Every Child Matters: Change for Children – Young People and Drugs gives guidance on co-operation and joint planning.
What is … The Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA)?
The CAA is currently being reformed and guidance has yet to be issued about how the framework will be built. However, the 2007-08 Corporate Assessment uses Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOE). These are likely to remain in some form. The 2008 KLOE currently in use are:
The corporate assessment uses Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOE) to provide a framework to gather and assess evidence about how the council is working.
The KLOEs are:
Theme 1 **Ambition for the community** Theme 2 **Prioritisation** Theme 3 **Capacity** Theme 4 **Performance management** Theme 5 **Achievement**
Achievement is assessed by exploring how the Local Authority is delivering local priorities and outcomes across five sub-themes.
- Sustainable communities and transport
- Safer and stronger communities
- Healthier communities
- Older people
- Children and young people
You are strongly advised to keep track of the evolving CAA framework by talking to colleagues, especially those in the Local Authority Chief Executive’s office and by getting anorak-y and by looking at the Audit Commission website www.audit-commission.gov.uk Local Health Plans
PCT’s build up Local Delivery Plans (LDP) which lay out spend and strategic intentions for healthcare for their local area. These sit alongside any additional local plans based on analysis of local health needs. You may hear a lot of mention of PCT targets. In terms of drugs, this means the drugs targets in Vital Signs – which are the same as those in the Local Indicator Set.
These plans are brought together by the Strategic Health Authority (which may comprise 7 or 8 PCT areas) into a single SHA plan for the Department of Health.
Other than Level Two Vital Signs targets, arrangements for performance management and delivery are a matter for local determination.
These should be set and monitored by the PCT in their role as a member of either the DAT or the CDRP and of course the LSP – which for PCTs, just like the rest of us, is the only game in town.
However well integrated your local authority and PCT there are still some health specific changes taking place that may impact on your local health partners:
**Our NHS Our Future** – Lord Darzi’s initial report of his review of the NHS on its 60th birthday proposed transformational system wide reform of health care. Lord Darzi called for a greater emphasis on services being orientated toward the experience of the patients. To do this will require a much greater integration of primary and secondary healthcare closer to the community. Darzi also challenges PCTs to transform (that word again) their commissioning into...
**World Class Commissioning** – If you haven’t heard of it yet you will do soon. World Class Commissioning requires PCTs and their partners to create structures for services that are strategic, focussed on outcomes and committed to community wide health improvement. What this means is that commissioning will need, like all of us, to be focussed on local intelligence, engaging with the community, working with partners and meeting local need. Central direction will be focussed on top line strategy. So where does this leave us?
In short – at the moment its probably fair to describe DATs and local partnerships working around drugs as accountable for everything but at the centre of nothing.
The multiplicity of specialist plans required of some DATs by central government bodies is daunting. But that’s as much a feature of the change in strategy and the driving force of the localism agenda after a period of real hard line central control. Its not a situation that will or should last – though its probably only local partnerships themselves who can shift the ground. We need to see what the impact of the National Audit Office and Cabinet Office work on delivery mechanisms turns out to be.
Whatever the confusion in terms of monitoring and development, there are a number of clear messages to DATs.
Your ambitions need to be about more than just treatment. Treatment is important, but given the localism agenda you need to be really getting your hands dirty with enforcement, education, community engagement and reintegration.
You need a stronger relationship with your LSP. You might do this by shifting local governance structures to ensure that the reporting and accountability line from your DAT goes to the LSP (albeit if necessary through one of its theme groups). The critical thing here of course will be to make sure this isn’t just about having a line on a chart, but about actually reporting to the LSP about what you’re doing and what you’re trying to do.
Show people what treatment can achieve if all the other stuff is happening alongside it. Demonstrate the impact street level policing can have on fear and community anxiety about drugs and drug related crime. If you talk about retention and stuff like that explain why its important. The targets we have don’t mean a lot to many on the LSP – you need to make the DAT agenda meaningful – and human. Use the new definition of recovery if this helps make the case.
Maybe your DATs or other local partnerships need to review their membership. If you don’t have key opinion formers, individuals with decision making power and people who really understand the drugs agenda, need to broaden your reach. Given how reliant you’re going to be over the next few years on your local links, now is time to give them a once over. Some people might see the lack of levers to really deliver on the new strategy as a problem. But actually it gives you a real opportunity to find your own. Instead of spending hours concentrating on national targets and imperatives you can devote time and resources to the issues that impact on your local area and the people who live there.
sara.mcgrail@btinternet.com
david.mackintosh@cityoflondon.gov.uk Useful contacts
Home Office The central source of information from the Drug Strategy Unit. A wealth of information which should be able to help with a wide range of queries, including identifying local contacts. www.drugs.gov.uk/Home
The National Treatment Agency The National Treatment Agency (NTA) is a special health authority, created by the Government in 2001 to help improve the availability, capacity and effectiveness of treatment for drug misuse in England. www.nta.nhs.uk
The London Drug Policy Forum www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/ldpf
For drug information and advice, the government funds FRANK 0800 77 66 00 www.talktofrank.com
For an update on many of the issues raised in this guide and a useful commentary on drug policy development. www.saramcgrail.co.uk Index
A Action Plan 4, 7, 42 Adfam 19 Alcohol Concern 19 Alliance, The 19 Annual Performance Assessment (APA) 45, 46 Area Based Grant (ABG) 9, 34, 37, 40 Area Cost Differential 33 Assessments of Policing and Community Safety (APACS) 9, 21, 37, 38, 39 Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) 12
B Basic/Borough Command Unit (BCU) 28, 29 Beast of Bodmin 24
C Cabinet Office 5, 48 Children and Young People’s Plans (CYPP) 45 Children and Young People Substance Misuse Plans 31 Children’s Act 2004, The 45, Children’s Trusts 11, 23, 27, 45, 46 Commission for Social Care Improvement (CSCI) 14, 31 Community Plan. See Sustainable Community Strategy Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA) 21, 39, 40, 46 Concordat 37 Court Service, The 18 Crime and Disorder Act 1998, The 20 Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs) 2, 3, 16, 20-22, 24, 25, 29-31, 36, 47 Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) 18
D Dashboard Reports 32 Demand reduction 4, 22 Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) 2, 3, 10, 11, 13, 16, 42, 43 Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) 11, 37 Department of Health (DH) 2, 3, 10, 13, 17, 33, 42, 47 Deputy Regional Managers 16 Drug Action Teams (DATs) 1-6, 14, 16, 21-25, 27, 28, 30-32, 34, 36, 40-43, 47, 48 Drug Intervention Programme (DIP) 8, 10, 13, 18, 23, 30, 32, 34, 38 Drugs - Protecting Communities and Families 2 DrugScope 19 Drugs Intervention Record (DIR) 32 Drugs Public Service Agreements 9 Drug Strategy Unit 13, 50
E Employment 6, 8, 30, 36, 39, 40, 42, European Association for the Treatment of Addiction (EATA) 19 Every Child Matters 45, 46
F Face the People 21, 44 FRANK 50
G Government Offices for the Regions (GORs) 2, 3, 13, 15-17, 37
H Hallmarks of Effective Partnership 20 Harm reduction 4, 11, 22, 28 Healthcare Commission (HCC) 13, 14, 27, 31 HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) 12 Home Office (HO) 2, 3, 10, 13, 16, 21, 23, 32, 34 Housing 6, 19, 23, 24, 27, 30, 36, 37, 39, 40, 44 I Integrated Drug Treatment System 22, 23, 31
J Joint Area Review (JAR) 45, 46 Joint Commissioning Groups (JCGs) 22, 24, 25, 30 Joint Commissioning Manager (JCM) 1, 22, 25
K Key Lines of Enquiry (KLOE) 46
L Local Area Agreement (LAA) 1, 9, 11, 16, 37, 40, 41 Local Authorities 1-3, 18, 20-22, 25, 27, 28, 31, 33-35, 37 41, 45-47 Local Criminal Justice Boards (LCJBs) 18 Local Government Association (LGA) 9, 37 Local Indicators 9, 21, 38 Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) 1, 2, 11, 17, 20, 24, 35-37, 40, 41, 44, 47, 48 London Drug Policy Forum (LDPF) 50
M Mainstreaming 5, 6, 20, 23, 32 Ministry of Justice (MoJ) 2, 3, 10, 13, 18 Models of Care (MoC) 25
N Narcotics Anonymous 19 National Drug Treatment Monitoring System (NDTMS) 17, 32 National Intelligence Model (NIM) 29 National Offender Management Service (NOMS) 10, 13, 16, 18 National Probation Service 18 National Treatment Agency for Substance Misuse (NTA) 2, 6, 8, 10, 11, 13, 14, 16, 24, 30-33, 38, 50 Needs Assessment 26, 30, 31, 37, 44, 45, NOMS Regional Offender Managers (NOMROMs) 10, 13, 16, NOMS Regional Offices 16
O Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted) 8, 27
P Personalisation 5, 14, 32 Planning Grids, The. See Treatment Plan 30 Police Authorities 12, 18, 29 Police Reform Act 2002, The 20 Pooled Treatment Budget (PTB) 8, 17, 22, 25, 30, 32, 33, 38 Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) 3, 10, 17, 21, 22, 23, 25, 30, 31, 41, 45, 47 Prison 10, 16, 18, 22, 23, 27, 31 Public Health Observatories (PHOs) 17 Public Service Agreements (PSAs) 2, 7-11, 21, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43
R Recovery 6, 10, 19, 40, 48 Regional Agencies 15 S Safer Neighbourhood Teams (SNTs) 29 Self-Assessment Checklist 30 Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) 12 Spending Review 7 Spot 35 Strategic Health Authorities (SHAs) 3, 10, 13, 17, 47 Strategic Summary, The. See Treatment Plan Supply reduction 4, 5 Supply side interventions 5, 22, 24 Sustainable Community Strategy 35, 37
T Tackling Drug Misuse 2 Treatment 17, 21-25, 28, 30-33, 37-40, 42-44, 48 Treatment in prisons 23 Treatment Outcome Profile (TOPs) 32, 42 Treatment Plan 30, 31
U United Kingdom Drug Policy Commission (UKDPC) 19
V Vital Signs 9, 10, 21, 30, 37-39, 47
W Working Neighbourhoods Fund 40
Y Youth Offender Institution (YOI) 22 York Formula 33 Youth Justice Board (YJB) 14, 16, 27 Youth Offending Teams (YOTs) 14, 16, 18, 27, 31, 45 ‘Local areas will have greater autonomy and flexibility to respond to the local needs and to the priorities of local communities, and this flexibility will underpin our new approach’
Drugs: Protecting Families and Communities 2008
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0183-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 56,
"total-input-tokens": 109887,
"total-output-tokens": 23636,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
101,
1
],
[
101,
947,
2
],
[
947,
3397,
3
],
[
3397,
5897,
4
],
[
5897,
5897,
5
],
[
5897,
8009,
6
],
[
8009,
10363,
7
],
[
10363,
12962,
8
],
[
12962,
14502,
9
],
[
14502,
16886,
10
],
[
16886,
18557,
11
],
[
18557,
20931,
12
],
[
20931,
22430,
13
],
[
22430,
23887,
14
],
[
23887,
26031,
15
],
[
26031,
28606,
16
],
[
28606,
28979,
17
],
[
28979,
30896,
18
],
[
30896,
32223,
19
],
[
32223,
33609,
20
],
[
33609,
36054,
21
],
[
36054,
37994,
22
],
[
37994,
39929,
23
],
[
39929,
42545,
24
],
[
42545,
45103,
25
],
[
45103,
47424,
26
],
[
47424,
49212,
27
],
[
49212,
50193,
28
],
[
50193,
51695,
29
],
[
51695,
53521,
30
],
[
53521,
55239,
31
],
[
55239,
57888,
32
],
[
57888,
59782,
33
],
[
59782,
62219,
34
],
[
62219,
64220,
35
],
[
64220,
64834,
36
],
[
64834,
67013,
37
],
[
67013,
68333,
38
],
[
68333,
71034,
39
],
[
71034,
73364,
40
],
[
73364,
75525,
41
],
[
75525,
77644,
42
],
[
77644,
78408,
43
],
[
78408,
80240,
44
],
[
80240,
81945,
45
],
[
81945,
84997,
46
],
[
84997,
87019,
47
],
[
87019,
89341,
48
],
[
89341,
91357,
49
],
[
91357,
93654,
50
],
[
93654,
94063,
51
],
[
94063,
94833,
52
],
[
94833,
96782,
53
],
[
96782,
98378,
54
],
[
98378,
99136,
55
],
[
99136,
99367,
56
]
]
} |
8ac636083d3fcf64cf4a02d1c2976313bd1c1890 | We welcome the publication of this latest survey of the workforce in the Library, Archive, Records and Information Management Services sector. It provides those of us working both in and with the sector with a very useful picture of the current demographics and qualifications of the workforce.
We hope that the sector will study the report with interest, but more importantly, will make use of it. We would especially urge those leading services within the sector to study and make use of the survey findings to benchmark their own workforce data. It is crucial that service leaders consider the pressing issues of succession planning and of job design for the future, in a world where economic and other pressures are rewriting our definitions of how we deliver library, archive, records and information management services, and whom we employ to do so.
The survey data will also prove invaluable to national agencies and government, to inform policy development and assess the impact of existing workforce strategies. In particular, the finding that 60 per cent of the sector workforce is aged 45 and above, with just 20 per cent aged less than 35 years, should trigger national debate among all relevant organisations about the need to attract and retain the best young people to work in our sector – debate that should lead to collective action to address the challenges.
LSIS, with its partners the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP), the Scottish Library and Information Council (SLIC) and The National Archives, is committed to undertaking this survey at regular intervals in the future, in order to provide useful trend data and to help to monitor the impact of changes in policy and funding within the sector. We hope that, in return, the sector will support this important work by providing the data required to ensure that future reports are as robust, or even more so, as this one.
Mike Hosking Chair of the Libraries, Archives, Records and Information Management panel for LSIS
Rob Wye Chief Executive, LSIS Executive Summary
- Understanding the workforce is a priority in any workforce development strategy, and a key requirement of this to have reliable and robust data on the demographics and characteristics of the workforce. Data on the workforce provides stakeholders with a greater understanding of their sector to present a case for lobbying with Government – both central and devolved administrations; helps with benchmarking and identification of best practice; as well as enabling providers to inform quality improvement; planning of service development activities and compliance with statutory equality monitoring.
- This is a workforce data report of the Library, Archive, Records and Information Management Services (LARIMS) sector across the UK, based on findings from a study conducted in the summer of 2012.
Aims, objectives, and methodology
- The findings of this report are based on a sample taken from across the LARIMS sector, which is regarded as comprising specialist Library, Archive, Records and Information Management Services providers. Providers operate across the public, private and third sector.
- This is the first large scale aggregate workforce data survey of the UK LARIMS sector and provides detailed data on demographics and qualifications of the workforce. This information can be used by policy-makers and for provider benchmarking.
- The response rate of 14 per cent is approximate, but reasonable for this initial survey. Any future work will hopefully be based upon firmer estimates of the total number of providers in the sector and achieve greater penetration.
Main findings from the survey
The survey gathered data from a sample of the LARIMS sector across the UK, with responses from 187 services, accounting for 11,381 members of staff. Responses were received from all four nations and from across the LARIMS sector.
- Most services who responded provide library services in a variety of settings. (64 per cent); 39 per cent provide archive services and 21 per cent provide information or records management services.
- Over half the services who responded (59 per cent), operate with a budget of under £500,000 and a further 30 per cent operate with a budget of over £1million. 75 per cent of services stated that more than half of their budget is staff payroll.
- In terms of demographics, staff in LARIMS services tend to be female and aged 45 or over, of white ethnicity. Data on disability and sexual orientation is very limited, therefore reducing the scope of any further analysis.
- Employment in Archives is most likely to be on a full time basis (more than 30 hours per week). In Libraries part time is almost as likely as full-time employment.
- Front line staff (who serve customers and internal customers on a daily basis) make up much of the total workforce (57 per cent), followed by professional staff (12 per cent) and front line supervisory staff (11 per cent). Archive services employ a higher proportion of professional and managerial staff than the rest of the LARIMS sector.
- The majority of the LARIMS workforce is paid £20,000 per annum or less (over 4,800 staff or 67 per cent of the LARIMS workforce. There is a greater proportion of staff in higher pay brackets in Archives services than there is in Library services. Data on staff qualifications is limited, but suggests that Library, Archive, Records and Information Management Services staff tend to be well qualified, with half qualified to first degree or postgraduate level. Furthermore, over a third hold qualifications to this level which are LARIMS-specific.
Conclusions and Recommendations
The 2012 Library, Archive, Records and Information Management Services (LARIMS) Workforce survey has yielded robust data and can be used as a baseline for future research to track year on year trends. The data can also be used to inform policy decisions, as well as acting as a resource for services to assess their organisation and the landscape they operate within. The survey response is very promising, showing reasonable penetration of the LARIMS sector.
LSIS recommends that:
- The surveys should continue to be undertaken at regular intervals. This will provide useful trend data, and will help to monitor the impact of current changes on LARIMS for both policy makers and employers alike.
- When undertaking any future LARIMS workforce survey, steps should be taken to enhance the response rate from library, record management and information management services, such as communicating the survey through specialist networks. Initial work should be undertaken to approximate service numbers for these types and confirm that there is indeed a need to boost response rate from these services.
- Barriers to disclosing data on disability and sexual orientation should be addressed. Stakeholder engagement with the LARIMS services is recommended, to highlight the benefits of the data, such as benchmarking. The survey may also be used as a prompt for services to update their processes for reporting on equality data. Further assurances on data confidentiality could also enhance disclosure of these details. Background
Reliable and robust data is key to building a national picture of the demographics and characteristics of the workforce. Robust workforce data provides LARIMS stakeholders with a greater understanding of their constituency to present a case for lobbying Government; to benchmark practice against sector norms and so focus future workforce planning; and to identify best practice. The data also provides a picture for national agencies and Government, both to evaluate and assess the impact of any existing workforce strategies, and to inform policy development and targets. Findings from a UK-wide workforce data survey is also used at the local level, to inform providers’ self-assessment, quality improvement and service planning activities, and compliance with statutory equality monitoring.
LSIS, working in partnership with the Chartered Institute of Library and Information Professionals (CILIP), the Scottish Library and Information Council (SLIC) and The National Archives undertook a data collection exercise to meet this need to gather data on workforce demographics and qualifications from the LARIMS sector. This report delivers the findings of this first large scale workforce data survey of the LARIMS sector across the UK, conducted in the summer of 2012.
Structure of the report
The report is made is made up of five sections.
Section 1 of the report explains the survey design and the rationale for selecting this methodology, as well as the aims and objectives of the research. It details the survey response, data cleansing methods, and a short advisory note on how to interpret data.
Section 2 looks at the data gathered by the survey on the shape and context of the LARIMS workforce; charts and analysis illustrate provider demographics such as budget size and the nation in which they provide their service. Part two of the section looks at staff roles and employment conditions, such as working hours, numbers of staff, and a breakdown of LARIMS sector work roles.
Section 3 examines the staff demographics in the sector, analysing provider types to determine age, gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity and disability overall and by provider type. The section also explores the level of qualifications held by those working within the sector and the pay bands of staff across the LARIMS sector.
Section 4 looks at the use of volunteers within services, with information on the number of volunteers, the number of hours they donate and the functions they fulfil.
Section 5 Conclusions and Recommendations - pulls key points from the data analysis and takes initial feedback from providers and stakeholders into account – this section explains the characteristics of each provider type; how the survey was received; ways in which the survey can be strengthened; and suggestions to boost participation levels for subsequent surveys.
The questionnaire is included in Appendix 1 for reference. Aims and objectives
The aim of this study is to generate demographic and qualifications data from a representative sample of the Library, Archive, Records and Information Management Services (LARIMS) sector, in order to better understand the makeup and volume of the workforce. In previous years, similar data was collected as part of Lifelong Learning UK’s (LLUK) Sector Skills Assessment data collection.
LSIS worked in conjunction with CILIP, SLIC and The National Archives to develop an online survey to gather information on staff to provide an aggregated picture of the LARIMS workforce for policymakers’ intelligence needs and for provider benchmarking.
For the purposes of this survey, the ‘LARIMS sector’ is regarded as comprising library, archive, records management and information management services across the public, private and third sector. Estimates on the number of providers within this scope are incomplete, so the following figures were used for sample preparation:
- Archives – approximately 300 services UK-wide
- Libraries – approximately 1,060 services UK-wide
- Records Management and Information Management services – No estimate was available for providers in this sector.
Methodology
The estimate of 1,400 Library, Archive, Records and Information Management Services providers was used to develop a sampling frame covering the main provider types within scope of this survey. A minimum response was devised and agreed with the stakeholders, as a number that would be realistic to achieve. This consisted of:
- Around 130 Library services, including representation from across the four nations and different types of library provision.
- Around 35 Archive services including representation across the four nations.
Responses were monitored to ensure that Records and Information Management services were represented in the final sample. The sample frame and the actual response received are shown in Table 1 on page 8. Table 1: Minimum sample created from the estimate of provider numbers and actual response received:
| Total number of providers | Minimum sample size | Actual response | Percentage of sector covered by response | |---------------------------|---------------------|-----------------|-----------------------------------------| | Whole sector | 1,360 | 165 | 187 | 14 | | Archives | 300 | 35 | 53 | 18 | | Libraries | 1,060 | 130 | 119 | 11 | | Records and Information Management services | Unknown | - | 15 | - |
Note: No figure for the total number of Records and Information Management services was available. The estimate of the number of services in the whole sector is therefore an underestimate and so the final estimate of sector covered by the response is likely to be a slight overestimate. The response of 119 libraries includes 18 ‘Library and archive services’.
An online questionnaire was developed and piloted with eight providers to test usability and functionality. Revisions were made to the survey instrument and the final survey was sent, via stakeholders and membership organisations, to LARIMS providers across the UK. The survey was also promoted via LSIS and stakeholder newsletters and websites.
The survey requested staff totals across the provider organisation and within particular groupings, rather than through the collection of detailed data on each individual staff member. Data was collected on demographics of all staff employed (and on the payroll) and qualifications of teaching staff during the collection period - summer 2012.
Survey response – 187 services responded to the survey, accounting for 11,381 members of staff. These responses are shown by nation and type of service (as specified by respondent) in Table 2 below.
Table 2: Type of LARIMS service by nation.
| Nation | England | Northern Ireland | Scotland | Wales | UK | |-------------------------|---------|------------------|----------|-------|-----| | LARIMS Sector | 142 | 6 | 27 | 12 | 187 | | Archive | 29 | 1 | 3 | 4 | 37 | | Combination of services | 34 | 0 | 8 | 2 | 44 | | Information service | 8 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 10 | | Library | 68 | 5 | 13 | 6 | 92 | | Records management service | 3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 4 |
In order to show more information on the “Combination of services” responses (as shown in Table 2), a derived variable was generated showing the overall type of service based on the respondents’ detailed description of what type of service their organisation provides. Responses were coded to ‘Library’, ‘Library and other service’, ‘Archive’, ‘Archive and other service’ or ‘Combined Library and Archive’. ‘Information services’ and ‘Records Management services’ were combined. This categorisation of the responding providers is used throughout the report and referred to as ‘derived type’. The response can be summarised:
38 Archive services 15 Archive and other services 93 Library services 18 Library and Archive services 15 Records and Information Management services (RIMS)
Data cleansing and analysis – Duplicates in the list of responding services were contacted to verify that there was no double counting (some organisations, such as Local Authorities, returned more than one response to the survey to provide details of separate services within the organisation.) Respondents whose data contained apparent errors were contacted to verify their figures. All the data was analysed and interpreted to develop common themes in terms of service type and budget. This report presents information on staff demographics, qualification levels, staff pay and use of volunteers.
Data Advisory – Not all respondents were able to answer all questions, so in some cases the total number of staff that analysis is based upon is lower and therefore less robust. For the purpose of reporting, analysis was performed without the missing numbers to accurately process available data. Where the number of staff missing from a result was significant, this has been highlighted in the report.
The LARIMS survey has achieved a good penetration of the sector for 2012, forming a positive basis on which future LARIMS workforce surveys may build in coming years. This section reviews the information on the responding services, staff roles and their employment within the LARIMS sector.
**Information on services**
**Provider type and location**
Analysis of the derived type of provider by nation is shown in Table 3 below. A regional analysis of responses from England was carried out to ensure that the response was representative of the whole of England. An analysis of the England responses by region is shown in Appendix 2.
**Table 3: Derived service type by nation.**
| Service Type | England | Northern Ireland | Scotland | Wales | UK | |------------------------------|---------|------------------|----------|-------|-----| | LARIMS Sector | 142 | 6 | 27 | 12 | 187 | | Archive | 29 | 1 | 4 | 4 | 38 | | Archive and other service | 13 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 15 | | Library | 69 | 5 | 13 | 6 | 93 | | Library and Archive | 14 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 18 | | Library and other service | 5 | 0 | 1 | 2 | 8 | | RIMS | 12 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 15 |
This response is shown in graph form in Figure 1, below.
**Figure 1: Response to the survey, by derived type of service and nation (number of services and percentage within each nation)**
Note: Data labels on the graph show numbers of responses.
\*Percentages based on totals of less than 100 should be treated with caution. From the description of the services delivered it can be concluded that 119 (or 64 per cent) of respondents provide library services and 73 (or 39 per cent) provide archive services. A total of 40 respondents (21 per cent) provide information or records management services. These groups of providers overlap (because of the multi-service nature of many respondents) and do not total 187.
The respondents were further asked to identify the specific type of organisation they represent and these results are shown in Table 4 below.
**Table 4: Specific type of service responding to the survey**
| Service Type | Number of respondents | Percentage | |---------------------------------------------|-----------------------|------------| | Health library | 50 | 26.7 | | Local Authority archive | 39 | 20.9 | | Public library | 29 | 15.5 | | Higher Education library | 11 | 5.9 | | Private or charity archive | 11 | 5.9 | | Records management (Public sector) | 5 | 2.7 | | Not for profit library | 4 | 2.1 | | Further Education library | 3 | 1.6 | | National archive | 3 | 1.6 | | Other Government funded archive | 3 | 1.6 | | Business or corporate archive | 1 | 0.5 | | Government library | 1 | 0.5 | | Industrial and commercial library | 1 | 0.5 | | National library | 1 | 0.5 | | School library | 1 | 0.5 | | Other, or combination of services | 24 | 12.8 | | **Total** | **187** | **100.0** |
Note: A full list of the specified “Other” types of organisation is shown in Appendix 3
**Budget**
Respondents were asked to categorise their service into budget brackets in order to determine the service ‘size’. The results, by derived type of service are shown in Table 5. Table 5: Budget of providers by derived service type.
| Service Type | Budget Overall budget of £1m+ | Budget Overall budget of £500K - £1m | Budget Overall budget of under £500K | |-------------------------------------|-------------------------------|--------------------------------------|-------------------------------------| | Whole sector | 54 | 21 | 108 | | Archive | 6 | 6 | 24 | | Archive and other service | 2 | 4 | 7 | | Library | 35 | 7 | 51 | | Library and Archive | 9 | 3 | 6 | | Library and other service | 2 | 0 | 6 | | RIMS | 0 | 1 | 14 |
Note: Four providers did not provide budget information and are excluded from the data.
The majority (59 per cent) of responses were from providers with a budget of less than £500K. 11 per cent have an overall budget of between £500K and £1 million and a further 30 per cent have budgets exceeding £1 million.
Respondents were asked what percentage of their budget was allocated to LARIMS staff salary and the results are shown in Table 6. 75 per cent of providers stated that more than half of their budget is allocated to staff payroll. Only nine per cent of services reported that less than 30 per cent of budget is allocated to payroll.
Table 6: Percentage of budget allocated to payroll by derived type of service.
| Service Type | Percentage of budget allocated to payroll | |-------------------------------------|------------------------------------------| | | Less than 30 per cent | 30 - 49 per cent | 50 - 69 per cent | 70 per cent and over | | Whole sector | 17 | 28 | 80 | 56 | | Archive | 2 | 6 | 17 | 11 | | Archive and other service | 1 | 2 | 5 | 5 | | Library | 12 | 14 | 42 | 24 | | Library and Archive | 1 | 2 | 9 | 5 | | Library and other service | 0 | 1 | 3 | 4 | | RIMS | 1 | 3 | 4 | 7 |
Note: Six providers did not provide budget information and are excluded from the data.
Staff roles and employment conditions
In total 11,381 staff members are accounted for by all providers responding to the survey. In each of the derived LARIMS provider types, the staff distribution is as follows:
Library services account for a total of 7,969 staff, ranging from a minimum of one to a maximum of 950 staff. Library and other services account for a total of 173 staff, ranging from a minimum of two to a maximum of 81 staff.
Archive services account for a total of 777 staff, ranging from a minimum of one to a maximum of 222 staff. Archive and other services account for a total of 200 staff, ranging from a minimum of one to a maximum of 39 staff.
Combined Library and Archive services account for a total of 2,213 staff, ranging from a minimum of one to a maximum of 640 staff.
Records and Information Management providers responding to the survey employ a total of 49 staff, ranging from a minimum of one to a maximum of twelve staff.
Figure 2: Number of staff reported by respondents, by derived type of service Table 7 and Figure 3 show that 4,309 (42 per cent) of the LARIMS sector workforce work over 30 hours per week.
Table 7: Hours worked per week by derived type of service (number of staff)
| | Over 30 hours per week | 16 - 30 hours per week | 15 hours per week or less | |----------------------|------------------------|------------------------|---------------------------| | Whole sector | 4,309 | 3,281 | 2,775 | | Archive | 617 | 126 | 34 | | Archive and other service | 128 | 63 | 9 | | Library | 2,554 | 2,227 | 2,172 | | Library and Archive | 890 | 797 | 526 | | Library and other service | 85 | 56 | 32 | | RIMS | 35 | 12 | 2 |
Note: Data was missing for 1,016 staff. These staff are excluded from the analysis above.
There is substantial variation between the different parts of the sector, ranging from 37 per cent of library staff to 79 per cent of archives staff working over 30 hours per week. Records and Information management service staff have a similar hours profile to Archive service staff, (although the percentages are based on a small number of staff).
Figure 3: Hours worked per week by derived type of service (percentage of staff)
Note: Data was missing for 1,016 staff. These staff are excluded from the analysis above.
\*Percentages for the RIMS workforce are based on a total of only 49 staff so should be treated with a degree of caution. The percentage of staff who work over 30 hours per week also varies with provider size (as determined by budget). Across the whole LARIMS sector, 64 per cent of staff who work in services with a budget of less than £500,000 and only 40 per cent of staff who work in services with budgets greater than £1 million work 30 hours per week or more.
**Figure 4: Hours worked per week by budget of provider (percentage of staff)**
Note: Data was missing for 1,016 staff. These staff are excluded from the analysis above.
**Occupational role**
Front line staff (who serve customers and internal customers on a daily basis) make up much of the total workforce (57 per cent), followed by professional staff (12 per cent) and front line supervisory staff (11 per cent). Archive services employ a higher proportion of professional and managerial staff than the rest of the LARIMS sector. This data is presented in Table 8 by type of LARIMS provider.
**Table 8: Occupational role by derived type of service (Numbers of staff)**
| | Managers | Professionals | Front line supervisory staff | Front line staff | Support staff | Other staff | Total | |----------------------|----------|---------------|------------------------------|------------------|--------------|------------|-------| | Whole sector | 449 | 1,219 | 1,094 | 5,867 | 849 | 905 | 10,383| | Archives | 38 | 156 | 40 | 172 | 51 | 7 | 464 | | Archive and other service | 19 | 93 | 15 | 49 | 12 | 11 | 199 | | Library | 240 | 649 | 834 | 4,280 | 455 | 862 | 7,320 | | Library and Archive | 139 | 267 | 190 | 1,254 | 305 | 24 | 2,179 | | Library and other service | 6 | 35 | 11 | 97 | 24 | 0 | 173 | | Records and Information Management Services | 7 | 19 | 4 | 15 | 2 | 1 | 48 |
Note: data on 998 staff was missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above.
Records and Information Management service providers have the highest proportion of managerial staff at 15 per cent (although this figure is based on a low number of overall staff in the survey). response), as seen in Figure 5. This is in comparison to only three per cent in Library services, eight per cent in Archive services. The relatively high numbers of staff in libraries means that the proportion of managerial staff for the whole sector is four per cent.
The majority of staff in Library services, Library and other services and Combined Library and Archive services are ‘Front line staff’(^1), a role which is not as common in the Archive services, Archive and other services and Records and Information Management services. Professional roles are far more common in these services.
**Figure 5: Occupational role by derived type of service (Percentage of staff)**
| Service Type | Managers | Professionals | Front line supervisory staff | Front line staff | Support staff | Other staff | |-------------------------------------|----------|---------------|------------------------------|-----------------|---------------|-------------| | Library | 3 | 9 | 11 | 58 | 6 | 12 | | Library and other service | 3 | 20 | 6 | 56 | 14 | | | Archives | 8 | 34 | 9 | 37 | 11 | | | Archive and other service | 10 | 47 | 8 | 25 | 6 | 6 | | Combined Library and Archive | 6 | 12 | 9 | 58 | 14 | | | Records and Information Management Services | 15 | 40 | 8 | 31 | 4 | | | Whole sector | 4 | 12 | 11 | 57 | 8 | 9 |
Note: Note: data on 998 staff was missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above. For clarity, data labels of less than 3 per cent are not shown.
\*Percentages for the RIMS workforce are based on a total of only 49 staff so should be treated with a degree of caution.
(^1) Front line staff was defined in the questionnaire as including all staff with a role that serves customers on a daily basis. “Customer” may include internal clients for some services. This section reviews the overall demographics of the LARIMS workforce (gender, age, ethnicity, disability and sexual orientation) and the level of qualifications held by staff. The number of staff members in each analysis varies, as not all respondents were able to answer all the questions in the survey.
**Gender**
78 per cent of LARIMS staff are female and 22 per cent are male, compared with 54 per cent female whole UK workforce(^2). Even though two members of staff were identified as transgender (both working within Libraries), there were 640 staff members for whom respondents did not enter the data or preferred not to disclose. This data field (along with others such as ethnicity, disability and sexual orientation) can be considered sensitive.
**Figure 6: Gender of the workforce by derived type of service (Percentage of staff)**
Note: Data on 640 staff was missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above.
\*Percentages for the RIMS workforce are based on a total of only 49 staff so should be treated with a degree of caution.
It is interesting to note that (in contrast with the rest of the LARIMS workforce) the gender balance in Archives is very similar to the figure across the wider UK workforce.
______________________________________________________________________
(^2) Labour Force Survey, four quarter average for 2011, Office for National Statistics. Age
The LARIMS workforce is largely aged 35 years and up, with 20 per cent aged less than 35 years. 60 per cent are aged 45 and above.
Table 9: Age of the workforce by derived type of service (Number of staff)
| | 24 years and under | 25-34 years | 35-44 years | 45-54 years | 55-64 years | 65 years and over | Total | |----------------------|--------------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------------|-------| | Library | 274 | 521 | 873 | 1,445 | 1,291 | 130 | 4,534 | | Library and other service\* | 2 | 10 | 16 | 27 | 28 | 5 | 88 | | Archives | 32 | 125 | 116 | 170 | 115 | 17 | 575 | | Archive and other service | 2 | 33 | 43 | 41 | 38 | 3 | 160 | | Combined Library and Archive | 144 | 396 | 418 | 629 | 545 | 43 | 2,175 | | Records and Information Management Services\* | 4 | 11 | 9 | 15 | 8 | 2 | 49 | | Whole sector | 458 | 1,096 | 1,475 | 2,327 | 2,025 | 200 | 7,581 |
Note: Data on 3,800 staff was missing. These staff are excluded from the table above.
Figure 7: Age of the workforce by derived type of service (Percentage of staff)
Note: Data on 3,800 staff was missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above. For clarity, data labels of less than 3 per cent are not shown.
\*Percentages for the Library and other service and RIMS workforces are based on low numbers of staff so should be treated with a degree of caution. With 60 per cent of staff aged 45 and over, LARIMS has a significantly older workforce than the whole UK labour force, where the comparable figure for 2011 was 41 per cent.
The percentage of the workforce that is aged 45 and over varies across the LARIMS sector. In Archives services and Archives and other services the figure is 53 per cent and 51 per cent respectively. This is lower than the figure for Library services and Library and other services, 63 and 68 per cent respectively.
Differences in the age demographic of staff across services of different size (as defined by budget) are not quite as marked, as shown in Figure 7. Small providers employ a slightly greater proportion of staff under the age of 45 (44 per cent for services with budgets under £500K) compared with larger services (40 per cent for services with budgets of £1million or more).
**Figure 8: Age of the workforce by budget of service (Percentage of staff)**
| Budget | 24 years and under | 25-34 years | 35-44 years | 45-54 years | 55-64 years | 65 years and over | |-----------------|--------------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------|-------------------| | Under £500K | 3.4 | 18.1 | 22.9 | 29.0 | 23.7 | 3.0 | | £500K - £1million | 15.3 | 24.4 | 33.8 | 22.5 | | | | £1 million plus | 6.5 | 14.1 | 18.9 | 30.6 | 27.2 | 2.6 |
Note: Data on 3,797 staff was missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above. For clarity, data labels of less than three per cent are not shown. Ethnicity
93.4 per cent of the LARIMS workforce for whom ethnicity data was provided are white, followed by 2.5 per cent Asian / Asian British, 1.6 per cent mixed ethnicity, 1.5 per cent other ethnic groups and 0.8 per cent Black / African / Caribbean / Black British. The whole UK workforce is 90.1 per cent white(^3), suggesting that the LARIMS workforce is under-representative of the black and ethnic minority population.
Table 10: Ethnicity of the workforce by derived type of service (Number of staff)
| | Asian/Asian British | Black / African / Caribbean | Mixed / multiple ethnic groups | White | Any other ethnic group | Total | |----------------------|---------------------|-----------------------------|--------------------------------|-------|------------------------|-------| | Whole sector | 169 | 52 | 110 | 6,432 | 103 | 6,866 | | Archives | 0 | 3 | 4 | 555 | 47 | 609 | | Archive and other service | 0 | 0 | 3 | 187 | 1 | 191 | | Library | 87 | 30 | 80 | 3,841 | 31 | 4,069 | | Library and Archive | 80 | 18 | 23 | 1,715 | 24 | 1,860 | | Library and other service\* | 1 | 1 | 0 | 86 | 0 | 88 | | Records and Information Management Services\* | 1 | 0 | 0 | 48 | 0 | 49 |
Note: Data on 4,604 staff was missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above
\*Percentages for the Library and other service and RIMS workforces are based on low numbers of staff so should be treated with a degree of caution.
An important point to note is that a high percentage of respondents did not answer the question on ethnicity or preferred not to disclose the information, leading to 40 per cent of the workforce data on ethnicity being missing or unknown.
Data on ethnicity by derived type of service is presented in Figure 9, minus white staff and the unknown data for clarity.
______________________________________________________________________
(^3) Labour Force Survey, four quarter average for 2011, Office for National Statistics. Figure 9: Black and ethnic minority staff in the workforce by derived type of service (Percentage of staff)
Note: Data on 4,604 staff was missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above. For clarity, the percentage of staff who are ‘White’ is not shown.
\*Percentages for the Library and other service and RIMS workforces are based on low numbers of staff so should be treated with a degree of caution.
There is a comparatively large number of staff within Archives services who are recorded as ‘Any other ethnic group’. This is due to one large service that responded to the survey that records staff as ‘White’ or ‘Black and minority ethnic’.
The ethnicity of the LARIMS workforce also varies across the different sizes of service, as defined by budget. Data on ethnicity by size of service is presented in Figure 10, minus white staff and the unknown data for clarity. In general, larger organisations employ a more diverse workforce.
Figure 10: Black and ethnic minority staff in the workforce by size of service (Percentage of staff)
Note: Data on 4,512 staff was missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above. For clarity, the percentage of staff who are ‘White’ is not shown. Disabilities
Data on disabilities is not well reported in responses to this survey, with 53 per cent preferring not to disclose the information or leaving the response blank. Of the staff for whom disability data was provided, 95.7 per cent have no disability. Two per cent have a physical impairment, 0.3 per cent have mental health issues and 0.1 per cent have a learning difficulty. A further 1.9 per cent of have another disability.
Table 11: Disability in the workforce (Percentage of staff)
| | Disability | No disability | |----------------------|------------|---------------| | Whole sector | 4.3 | 95.7 | | Archives | 3.7 | 96.3 | | Archive and other service | 5.2 | 94.8 | | Library | 4.0 | 96.0 | | Library and Archive | 4.8 | 95.2 | | Library and other service\* | 0.0 | 100.0 | | Records and Information Management Services\* | 5.7 | 94.3 |
Data for 5,322 staff was missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above.
Reporting of disability in the whole UK workforce is somewhat higher. The Labour Force Survey(^4) data shows 15 per cent of the UK workforce has a disability.
Sexual Orientation
This data field is largely left as blank or prefer not to say/unknown (87 per cent, with 9,913 people unaccounted for in survey answers). For this reason, any detailed analysis on sexual orientation has not been undertaken, as a true picture cannot be discerned from the data gathered.
High levels of non disclosure of data on disability and sexual orientation impacts on the level of analysis that can be undertaken on the make up of the workforce, however, public sector bodies and organisations that receive public funding, or work with organisations that do, are now required to keep a detailed level of information on staff demographics including ethnicity and sexual orientation, according to the Equality Act 2010.(^5) It may therefore be that whilst organisations hold the data internally, there is some concern to share these data with external data collectors, such as LSIS. For this reason, further stakeholder engagement is recommended with employers to highlight the benefits of sharing this data; the workforce data survey could be used as a prompt for providers to update their processes for reporting on equality data. Further assurances on data confidentiality could enhance disclosure of these details.
______________________________________________________________________
(^4) Labour Force Survey, four quarter average for 2011, Office for National Statistics.
(^5) The Act also extends to private and voluntary bodies who bid for tenders and other procurements from the public sector. Regulations are in force to assist public authorities in better performance of the Equality Duty, including a requirement to publish equality objectives every four years and to publish information to demonstrate their compliance with the equality duty at least annually. Authorities with 150 or more staff are required to report workforce equality data for greater transparency and progress checks on equality issues. With the exception of schools, public authorities were required to demonstrate their compliance by January 2012, and have delivered equality objectives by April 2012. Qualifications
Respondents were asked to specify how many staff held particular qualifications levels as their highest LARIMS specific qualification, and a similar question for their highest general qualification. The question was worded slightly differently in Scotland to reflect the differing qualifications framework (Scottish Credit and qualifications Framework, or SCQF). The combined data on LARIMS specific qualifications held by staff (by derived type of service) is shown in Figure 11. Data on the general qualifications level of staff was less complete, so a breakdown by derived type is not possible. This data is shown for the whole sector in Figure 12.
It is important to note that data is missing for 8,950 staff (79 per cent of staff in the sample) and as such, the results must be treated with caution. There was a significant amount of feedback from many respondents that this data is not kept centrally in any accessible format, so it was quite difficult for respondents to complete. The unknown/missing data are excluded from the graphs below.
Figure 11: Level of highest LARIMS specific qualification held (Percentage of staff)
Note: Data for 8,950 staff is missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above.
\*Based on low numbers, percentages should be treated with caution. Almost half of the workforce (for whom data was submitted) is qualified to degree level or above, a significantly greater proportion than the wider workforce across the UK of which 28 per cent is qualified to this level(^6).
______________________________________________________________________
(^6) Labour Force Survey, four quarter average for 2011, Office for National Statistics. Pay
Respondents were asked to categorise staff into pay bands. The numbers of staff in each band, by derived type of service, is shown in Table 12. The percentages in each pay band within each derived service type is shown in Table 13. For clarity the percentages within each pay band for the whole LARIMS sector is shown in Figure 13.
Table 12: Pay bands - LARIMS workforce by derived type of service (Number of staff)
| | Less than £15,000 | £15,000 - £20,000 | £20,001 - £25,000 | £25,001 - £30,000 | £30,001 - £35,000 | £35,001 - £40,000 | £40,001 - £45,000 | £45,001 - £50,000 | More than £50,000 | |----------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------| | Whole sector | 1,719 | 3,144 | 959 | 657 | 356 | 200 | 103 | 68 | 49 | | Archives | 65 | 171 | 131 | 142 | 89 | 54 | 15 | 14 | 9 | | Archive and other service | 16 | 49 | 27 | 54 | 27 | 7 | 6 | 1 | 6 | | Library | 1,286 | 1,773 | 372 | 263 | 126 | 59 | 29 | 19 | 15 | | Library and Archive | 253 | 1,119 | 406 | 172 | 100 | 69 | 46 | 34 | 14 | | Library and other service | 95 | 22 | 15 | 18 | 8 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 3 | | Records and Information Management Services | 4 | 10 | 8 | 8 | 6 | 6 | 4 | 0 | 2 |
Note: Data for 4,126 staff is missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above.
Table 13: Pay bands - LARIMS workforce by derived type of service (Percentage of staff)
| | Less than £15,000 | £15,000 - £20,000 | £20,001 - £25,000 | £25,001 - £30,000 | £30,001 - £35,000 | £35,001 - £40,000 | £40,001 - £45,000 | £45,001 - £50,000 | More than £50,000 | |----------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------| | Whole sector | 24 | 43 | 13 | 9 | 5 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | | Archives | 9 | 25 | 19 | 21 | 13 | 8 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | Archive and other service | 8 | 25 | 14 | 28 | 14 | 4 | 3 | 1 | 3 | | Library | 33 | 45 | 9 | 7 | 3 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | | Library and Archive | 11 | 51 | 18 | 8 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 2 | 1 | | Library and other service | 56 | 13 | 9 | 11 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 2 | | Records and Information Management Services\* | 8 | 21 | 17 | 17 | 13 | 13 | 8 | 0 | 4 |
Note: Data for 4,126 staff is missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above.
\*Based on low numbers, percentages should be treated with caution. The majority of the LARIMS workforce is paid £20,000 per annum or less (over 4,800 staff or 67 per cent of the LARIMS workforce.
There is a greater proportion of staff in higher pay brackets in Archives services (26 per cent of archives staff earn more than £30,000 per annum) than there is in Library services (only six per cent earn more than £30,000 per annum), which may be due to the greater proportion of Archives staff in professional occupations or to the greater proportion of male staff within Archive services. Without individualised data it is not possible to tell whether this pay difference is related to either occupation or gender.
**Figure 13: Pay bands of whole LARIMS sector (Percentage of staff)**
Note: Data for 4,126 staff is missing. These staff are excluded from the analysis above. Section 4: Use of Volunteers
Respondents were asked if their service made use of volunteers. The response is shown in Table 14, by derived type of service and budget of service.
Table 14: Use of volunteers by derived type of service and budget (Number of services)
| Service uses volunteers | No | Yes | Total | Percentage of services that use volunteers | |-------------------------|----|-----|-------|------------------------------------------| | Whole sector | 80 | 107 | 187 | 57 | | Archive | 4 | 34 | 38 | 89\* | | Archive and other service| 2 | 13 | 15 | 87\* | | Library | 56 | 37 | 93 | 40 | | Library and Archive | 0 | 18 | 18 | 100\* | | Library and other service| 6 | 2 | 8 | 25\* | | RIMS | 12 | 3 | 15 | 20\* | | Overall budget of £1m + | 13 | 41 | 54 | 76\* | | Overall budget of £500K - £1m | 7 | 14 | 21 | 67\* | | Overall budget of under £500K | 59 | 49 | 108 | 45 |
\*Percentages based on low totals should be treated with caution.
In general, Archives services are more likely to use volunteers than Library services or Records Management or Information services. Larger services (based on budget) are more likely to use volunteers than smaller ones, presumably because these larger services have both the infrastructure to utilise the volunteers’ work and the greater profile to attract them. Table 15: Number of volunteers and donated hours by derived tape of service and budget
| Service Type | Number of volunteers | Total number of donated hours per week | Average number of hours per week per volunteer | |-------------------------------------|----------------------|----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------| | Whole sector | 5,557 | 4,959 | 0.9 | | Archive | 628 | 1,286 | 2.0 | | Archive and other service | 193 | 2,235 | 3.0 | | Library | 3,590 | 1,579 | 0.4 | | Library and Archive | 1,109 | 1,450 | 1.3 | | Library and other service | 31 | 47 | 1.5 | | RIMS | 6 | 18 | 3.0 | | Overall budget of £1m + | 376 | 993 | 2.6 | | Overall budget of £500K - £1m | 396 | 2,700 | 2.6 | | Overall budget of under £500K | 4,772 | 2,902 | 0.6 |
In total, the 107 services who do use volunteers use 5,557 volunteers and a total of 4,959 donated hours of work per week (or an average of 0.9 hours per volunteer). In general volunteers at Library services donate fewer hours per week (per volunteer) than volunteers at Archive services.
The comparatively larger proportion of Archive services (and Archive and other services) that use volunteers and the comparatively greater number hours that they donate may be due to a larger proportion of volunteer-run services within this part of the LARIMS sector, or it may simply be the case that there are more roles available within Archives services that are better suited to volunteers. Table 16: Functions performed by volunteers by derived type of service (Number of services)
| Function | Archive | Archive and other service | Library | Library and Archive | Library and other service | RIMS | Total | |-----------------------------------------|---------|---------------------------|---------|---------------------|---------------------------|------|-------| | Cataloguing and Indexing | 33 | 12 | 8 | 13 | 0 | 1 | 67 | | Projects | 23 | 9 | 14 | 11 | 2 | 2 | 61 | | Preservation and conservation | 24 | 7 | 4 | 8 | 1 | 0 | 44 | | Promotional / Marketing / Events | 6 | 2 | 12 | 6 | 2 | 1 | 29 | | Community engagement | 9 | 3 | 9 | 6 | 0 | 0 | 27 | | IT / Support buddies | 0 | 2 | 17 | 3 | 2 | 0 | 24 | | Administrative support | 4 | 1 | 13 | 3 | 1 | 2 | 24 | | Housebound delivery | 0 | 0 | 18 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 22 | | Storytelling, Bookstart/Bookbug | 0 | 0 | 12 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 14 | | Directional help - HE/FE helpers | 0 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 1 | 0 | 6 | | VIP services - recording newspapers/guides| 0 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 5 | | Quality assurance / mystery shopping | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | | Other | 2 | 1 | 15 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 24 | | Total services that use volunteers | 34 | 13 | 37 | 18 | 2 | 3 | 107 |
The most commonly reported function carried out by volunteers across the sector is ‘Cataloguing and Indexing’ (67 out of 107 respondents who use volunteers). This is also the most commonly reported function within Archives (33 out of 34 who use volunteers). The most commonly reported function performed by volunteers within Library services is ‘Housebound delivery’ (18 out of 37 who use volunteers). A further 24 respondents specified ‘Other’ functions carried out by volunteers, which included fundraising activities, reader services and shelving. A complete list of responses is provided in Appendix 4. Conclusions
The 2012 Library, Archive, Records and Information Management Services (LARIMS) Workforce survey has yielded robust data and can be used as a baseline for future research to track year on year trends. The data can also be used to inform policy decisions, as well as acting as a resource for services to assess their organisation and the landscape they operate within.
In the main, the sample of providers obtained of this study are representative of the different types of service across the LARIMS sector, although any future study would benefit from a greater response from certain types of services such as Local Authority libraries. Records and Information Management providers may also be under-represented.
Within this context, the main conclusions from this study are:
- Most services who responded provide library services in a variety of settings. (64 per cent); 39 per cent provide archive services and 21 per cent provide information or records management services.
- Over half the services who responded (59 per cent), operate with a budget of under £500,000 and a further 30 per cent operate with a budget of over £1 million.
- 75 per cent of services stated that more than half of their budget is staff payroll.
- In total, the sample reports just under 11,400 staff working in Library, Archive, Records and Information Management Services.
- Employment in Archives is most likely to be on a full time basis (more than 30 hours per week). In Libraries part time is almost as likely as full-time employment.
- Front line staff (who serve customers and internal customers on a daily basis) make up much of the total workforce (57 per cent), followed by professional staff (12 per cent) and front line supervisory staff (11 per cent). Archive services employ a higher proportion of professional and managerial staff than the rest of the LARIMS sector.
- In terms of demographics, staff in LARIMS services tend to be female and aged 45 or over, of white ethnicity. Data on disability and sexual orientation is very limited, therefore reducing the scope of any further analysis.
- The majority of the LARIMS workforce is paid £20,000 per annum or less (over 4,800 staff or 67 per cent of the LARIMS workforce. There is a greater proportion of staff in higher pay brackets in Archives services than there is in Library services.
- Data on staff qualifications is very limited, but suggests that Library, Archive, Records and Information Management Services staff tend to be well qualified, with half qualified to first degree or postgraduate level. Furthermore, over a third hold qualifications to this level which are LARIMS-specific. Recommendations
Recommendations for future research
The response to this survey is very promising, showing reasonable penetration of the LARIMS sector. Therefore, it is recommended that the surveys should continue to be undertaken at regular intervals. This will provide useful trend data, and will help to monitor the impact of current changes on LARIMS for both policy makers and employers alike.
When undertaking any future LARIMS workforce survey, it is recommended that steps be taken to enhance the response rate from library, record management and information management services, such as communicating the survey through specialist networks. Initial work should be undertaken to approximate service numbers for these types and confirm that there is indeed a need to boost response rate from these services.
Furthermore, barriers to disclosing data on disability and sexual orientation need to be addressed. Stakeholder engagement with the sector employers is recommended, to highlight the benefits of the data, such as benchmarking. The survey may also be used as a prompt for services to update their processes for reporting on equality data. Further assurances on data confidentiality could also enhance disclosure of these details.
In designing future surveys, further use of an automatic calculation of totals for respondents should be considered where possible. Additional alerts of any errors before proceeding to the next question may also be added. Although this system was used on some questions in the survey it was not used on all, which may have resulted in some confusion.
The layout of some questions in the survey may be reconsidered. The qualifications questions in particular were difficult to complete, either because such data was not held by services, or because the layout was confusing. There was a significant amount of feedback from many respondents that qualifications data is not kept centrally in any accessible format. Further investigation is required to determine the best way to obtain qualifications data. Appendix 1: LARIMS survey questionnaire
Workforce data collection from the LARIMS sector- 2012
LSIS is gathering data on the composition of the Libraries, Archives, Records and Information Management Services (LARIMS) workforce. The data will be valuable for tracking change in the workforce, both sector-wide and within your own service. Please provide as much information as you can.
It is very important that you use this offline (pdf) version of the questions to gather the required information before completing the survey online.
What data is being collected: Data about staff who are directly employed by your service to deliver or support LARIMS services and are on the payroll on 1st April 2012. If your service is part of a larger organisation, such as a Local Authority, we are only interested in the staff who work within the LARIMS service.
Who should complete the survey: LARIMS Service Managers - someone who has information about all staff in the service in terms of their demographic characteristics and qualifications. If you do not have this information, please forward the survey link to a more appropriate person within the service.
Confidentiality of data provided: All information you provide will be treated in confidence and will not be shared. No organisation, service or individual will be identified in our analysis and all analysis will be undertaken to provide an aggregated picture.
For more information: please contact Hal Bonella (hal.bonella@lsis.org.uk)
Survey closes (extended deadline): 8th July 2012
Section 1: About your service
We would like to ask you some questions about your service. This information will provide us with data that we can analyse to offer you more appropriate benchmarking information.
1. Please tell us what type of LARIMS service you represent? (Please select one option)
- Library
- Archive
- Records management service
- Information service
- Combination of services Please specify
2. What kind of organisation do you represent? (Please select one option that most closely matches your business)
- Local Authority archive
- Business or corporate archive
- Private or charity archive
- National archive
- Other Government funded archive
- Records management (Corporate)
- Records management (Public sector)
- Online information service Further Education library Government library Higher Education library Health library Industrial and commercial library Law library National library Not for profit library Prison library Public library Public: Children’s and Youth library School library Other, or combination of services Please specify
3. What budget is allocated to your service (please include all budget streams applicable to your service)? (Please select one option)
- Overall budget of £1m +
- Overall budget of £500K - £1m
- Overall budget of under £500K
4. What percentage of this budget is allocated to LARIMS staff salary (including on-costs, excluding training costs)? (Please select one option)
- Less than 30 per cent
- 30 - 49 per cent
- 50 - 69 per cent
- 70 per cent and over
5. In which nation is your service based/ headquartered? (Please select one option)
- England
- Northern Ireland
- Scotland
- Wales
(If Nation = England)
6. In which region is your service based/ headquartered? (Please select only one option)
- East of England
- East Midlands
- Greater London
- North East
- North West
- South East
- South West
- West Midlands
- Yorkshire and Humberside Section 2: About your workforce
We would like to ask you about the people employed by your service.
Please give us information, as accurately as possible, about all LARIMS staff employed directly by your service who are on the payroll on 1st April 2012. Please note the following:
Please do not include agency staff, self employed staff, visiting staff who are paid a one off fee or unpaid volunteer workers.
07. How many LARIMS staff are on your service’s payroll? Total number of staff \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
08. Of this “all staff total”, how many work the following hours per week? (Could you ensure that the total adds up to the total number of staff) Over 30 hours per week \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ 16 - 30 hours per week \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ 15 hours per week or fewer \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
09. Please tell us the number of LARIMS staff that are primarily engaged in the following occupational categories. (Where an individual works in more than one of the categories, please include them in the category that they spend most of their time working in.)
Managers - includes directors, senior and other managers including Department Heads Professionals - includes specialist staff such as librarians, archivists, conservators Front line supervisory staff - includes all paraprofessionals in a supervisory customer facing role. “Customer” may include internal clients for some services. Front line staff - includes all staff with a role that serves customers on a daily basis. “Customer” may include internal clients for some services. Support staff - includes all administrative, technical and clerical staff who provide support or information to colleagues within the service. Other staff \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
10. Please tell us about the gender profile of all LARIMS staff. How many staff are in the following categories? (Could you ensure that the total adds up to the total number of staff)
Male \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Female \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Transgender \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Prefer not to say/Unknown \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
11. Please tell us about the age profile of all LARIMS staff. How many staff are in the following categories? (Could you ensure that the total adds up to the total number of staff)
24 years and under \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ 25-34 years \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ 35-44 years \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ 45-54 years \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ 55-64 years \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ 65 years and over \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Prefer not to say/Unknown \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
12. Please tell us about the ethnic profile of all LARIMS staff. How many staff are in the following categories? (Could you ensure that the total adds up to the total number of staff)
- Asian/Asian British
- Black / African / Caribbean / Black British
- Mixed / multiple ethnic groups
- White
- Any other ethnic group
- Prefer not to say/Unknown
13. Please tell us about the disability profile of all LARIMS staff. How many staff are in the following categories? (Could you ensure that the total adds up to the total number of staff)
- Physical impairment
- Learning difficulty
- Mental health
- Other
- No disability
- Prefer not to say/Unknown
14. Please tell us about the sexual orientation of all LARIMS staff. How many staff are in the following categories? (Could you ensure that the total adds up to the total number of staff)
- Heterosexual
- Gay
- Lesbian
- Bisexual
- Prefer not to say/Unknown
15. Please tell us about the annual full time equivalent (FTE) salary of staff employed by your service. How many are in the following annual salary brackets? (Could you ensure that the total adds up to the total number of staff)
- Less than £15,000
- £15,000-£20,000
- £20,001-£25,000
- £25,001-£30,000
- £30,001-£35,000
- £35,001-£40,000
- £40,001-£45,000
- £45,001-£50,000
- More than £50,000
- Prefer not to say/Unknown
(If Nation = England, NI or Wales) These question are about the level of qualifications held by your staff. Please include all staff in both columns, as we are interested in their highest professional qualification, and their highest academic/vocational qualification. For more information on the QCF and comparing levels, please refer to this document: http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Documents/Quals_cross_boundaries.pdf
16. How many of your staff have the following as their highest LARIMS specific qualification?
17. How many of your staff have the following as their highest qualification (including all non-LARIMS specific qualifications)? The questions are about the level of qualifications held by your staff. Please include all staff in both columns, as we are interested in their highest professional qualification, and their highest academic/vocational qualification. For more information on the SCQF and comparing levels, please refer to this document: [http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Documents/Quals_cross_boundaries.pdf](http://www.qaa.ac.uk/Publications/InformationAndGuidance/Documents/Quals_cross_boundaries.pdf)
| Qualification | Column 1 | Column 2 | |----------------------------------------------------|----------|----------| | Doctorate or equivalent level (QCF Level 8) | | | | Masters Degree or equivalent level (QCF Level 7) | | | | Bachelors Degree or equivalent level (QCF Level 6) | | | | Foundation Degree, HND or equivalent level (QCF Level 5) | | | | Certificate of Higher Education or equivalent level (QCF Level 4) | | | | 2 A levels, 4 AS levels or equivalent level (QCF Level 3) | | | | 5+ GCSEs at grades A-C or equivalent level (QCF Level 2) | | | | GCSEs at grades D-G or equivalent level (QCF Level 1) | | | | Entry level Certificate, Foundation Diploma or equivalent (QCF Entry level) | | | | Unknown | | | | Relevant professional body award (such as ARA, ACLIP, Museums Association award, British Computer Society award, etc. NB: awards, not membership) | | | | Other | | | | No formal qualifications | | |
18. How many of your staff have the following as their highest LARIMS specific qualification?
19. How many of your staff have the following as their highest qualification (including all non-LARIMS specific qualifications)? Section 3: About your workforce
We would like to ask you about any other people who contribute to your service.
20. Does your service use volunteers?
- Yes
- No
(If Q20 = Yes) 21. On average, how many volunteers does your service use? (If an exact total is not possible, for example due to seasonal variation, please give an estimate of the average.) Number of volunteers: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
(If Q20 = Yes) 22. What is the average total hours per week that is donated by this total number of volunteers? (If an exact total is not possible please give an estimate of the average.) Total number of donated hours per week: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
(If Q20 = Yes) 23. What functions do these volunteers undertake? (Please select all that apply)
- Directional help - HE/FE helpers
- IT/Support buddies
- Cataloguing and Indexing
- Projects
- Preservation and conservation
- Promotional or Marketing (including assistance at events)
- Community engagement
- Quality assurance/mystery shopping
- Story telling, Bookstart/Bookbug
- Housebound delivery
- VIP services - recording newspapers/guides
- Administrative support
- Other Please specify Section 4: Your contact details
Please note that your details will not be shared with anyone. We may, in some cases, need to contact you to clarify aspects of your return.
24. Will you be willing to participate in future studies? □ Yes □ No
25. Please provide us with your contact details Name \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Organisation name \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Address \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Contact number (no spaces) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Email address \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Thank you for participating in the survey. Please go to the survey online using the link provided. Once you have entered your data, please press “Submit” so that we receive your response.
A report of findings will be available in August 2012.
For any more information about this survey, please contact Hal Bonella (hal.bonella@lsis.org.uk)
### Appendix 2: Regional response in England
| Region | Count | Percentage | |-------------------------|-------|------------| | East Midlands | 6 | 4.2 | | East of England | 9 | 6.3 | | Greater London | 39 | 27.5 | | North East | 6 | 4.2 | | North West | 21 | 14.8 | | South East | 16 | 11.3 | | South West | 11 | 7.7 | | West Midlands | 17 | 12.0 | | Yorkshire and Humberside| 17 | 12.0 |
Although the response in the North East and the East Midlands was comparatively low, the distribution of responses across the nine regions is reasonable (to an extent reflecting greater population concentrations in certain regions, i.e. Greater London). Appendix 3: Specified “Other” types of service
Archives and information management in local authority Business - Archives and Records Management Charity Library, Archive and Information Service Charity, Information Manager. (archive, online, publications, communications) Document services department Health and social care local information, communication and research service Health charity Health information service Higher Education Archive service Higher Education Information Governance Archive and Museum Service Information service for & about Voluntary Sector (specifically social care) in Scotland Knowledge Service - Public Health LARIMS staff generally (staff who run the reading rooms, work in conservation, deal with the archives sector as a whole, work in records management) Local authority - public library and archive service Local authority archive, records management service and public library Local Authority Libraries, Archives and Records Management Services Local Authority Library & Archive service National museum library and archive NHS archive with mixed, including government, funding Professional Institution Professional membership organisation Public Library - Schools Library Service - Archives - Records Management - Information (ALL Local Authority) Public, Prison and Schools Library Service Religious Organisation Royal College University Appendix 4: Specified “Other” functions of volunteers
**Archive**
- Digitisation, leading and facilitation of courses
- Fund raising
**Archive and other service**
- Fund-raising, search room buddies
**Library**
- Assistance with self service
- Frontline duties in community run libraries
- Hospital Book trolley service; Books Aloud reminiscence with adults
- Inputting to catalogue, inter-library loans, assisting users(directional help?)
- Patient trolley rounds
- Read to Relax - reading aloud for adults with mental health issues
- Reading Group support; read-aloud groups
- Reading Groups and Read to Me (Housebound Customers)
- Reading/Listening Group Support; Summer reading Challenge support; Headspace; Book Pushers; Reading & ; Making local study resources accessible
- Shelving
- Shelving books and shelf tidying
- Summer reading challenge
- Summer reading challenge, Local and family history support
**Library and Archive**
- General and various tasks - filing, sorting, arranging, press cuttings etc
- Reader Services
- Research for exhibitions
- Staffing helpline
- Various library/archive tasks
**Records or Information Management**
- Retrieval of files; appraisal and disposal of time expired records
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0184-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 42,
"total-input-tokens": 86721,
"total-output-tokens": 19300,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
0,
1
],
[
0,
0,
2
],
[
0,
2061,
3
],
[
2061,
5361,
4
],
[
5361,
7213,
5
],
[
7213,
10146,
6
],
[
10146,
12103,
7
],
[
12103,
15117,
8
],
[
15117,
16875,
9
],
[
16875,
18503,
10
],
[
18503,
20993,
11
],
[
20993,
24535,
12
],
[
24535,
25443,
13
],
[
25443,
27303,
14
],
[
27303,
29877,
15
],
[
29877,
32356,
16
],
[
32356,
33688,
17
],
[
33688,
35577,
18
],
[
35577,
37265,
19
],
[
37265,
39763,
20
],
[
39763,
40973,
21
],
[
40973,
44272,
22
],
[
44272,
45582,
23
],
[
45582,
45906,
24
],
[
45906,
50126,
25
],
[
50126,
50936,
26
],
[
50936,
52722,
27
],
[
52722,
55322,
28
],
[
55322,
58535,
29
],
[
58535,
61195,
30
],
[
61195,
63247,
31
],
[
63247,
65601,
32
],
[
65601,
66812,
33
],
[
66812,
69392,
34
],
[
69392,
71401,
35
],
[
71401,
73449,
36
],
[
73449,
74633,
37
],
[
74633,
75586,
38
],
[
75586,
76426,
39
],
[
76426,
77804,
40
],
[
77804,
79026,
41
],
[
79026,
79026,
42
]
]
} |
8971f36ae09c9b138a923046f7ee5c6c5ee08e9f | DCLG Salary Transparency
The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) has sought consent from individuals to publish the names and salaries of those staff earning a full-time salary over £58,200 reflecting The Code of Recommended Practice for Local Authorities on Data Transparency, which was published by the Department on 29th September 2011.
The full Code of Recommended Practice can be accessed here:
http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/localgovernment/transparencycode
On the 30th September 2012, 170 Department staff were earning a full-time salary of £58,200 or higher. Please note that though all of these 170 staff have a full time salary of £58,200 or higher, some of these staff work part time and the salary they receive adjusted accordingly. The figures quoted here all refer to the full time salaries of individuals, regardless of whether they work full time or not.
The breakdown of these staff in salary bands by DCLG Group is as follows:
| Group | Full Time Salary Floor | Full Time Salary Ceiling | Total | |------------------------------|------------------------|--------------------------|-------| | Permanent Secretary | £200,000 | £204,999 | 1 | | | £58,200 | £64,999 | 19 | | | £65,000 | £69,999 | 12 | | | £70,000 | £74,999 | 18 | | | £75,000 | £79,999 | 2 | | | £95,000 | £99,999 | 4 | | | £100,000 | £104,999 | 1 | | | £105,000 | £109,999 | 1 | | | £110,000 | £114,999 | 2 | | | £125,000 | £129,999 | 1 | | | £135,000 | £139,999 | 1 | | Finance & Corporate Services | | | 61 | | | £58,200 | £64,999 | 25 | | | £65,000 | £69,999 | 6 | | | £70,000 | £74,999 | 4 | | | £80,000 | £84,999 | 3 | | | £85,000 | £89,999 | 1 | | | £105,000 | £109,999 | 1 | | | £130,000 | £134,999 | 1 | | | £165,000 | £169,999 | 1 | | Localism | | | 42 | | | £58,200 | £64,999 | 21 | 59 DCLG earning a full-time salary over £58,200 consented to disclosure of their name and salary details in salary bands as follows:
| Last Name | First Name | Full Time Salary Floor | Full Time Salary Ceiling | |------------|------------|------------------------|--------------------------| | ADAMS | CLAIRE | £65,000 | £69,999 | | ALAFAT | TERRIE | £105,000 | £109,999 | | ALDRIDGE | STEPHEN | £100,000 | £104,999 | | BLACKHALL | DEREK | £70,000 | £74,999 | | BOWREY | JULIAN | £70,000 | £74,999 | | BRIGHT | JONATHAN | £95,000 | £99,999 | | BRODRICK | DAWN | £95,000 | £99,999 | | BURCH | MARK | £75,000 | £79,999 | | BURD | ANTHONY | £58,200 | £64,999 | | BURKITT | NICHOLAS | £58,200 | £64,999 | | CAMPBELL | ANDREW | £90,000 | £94,999 | | CARROLL | MARK | £105,000 | £109,999 | | CASEY | LOUISE | £130,000 | £134,999 | | COX | PHILIP | £90,000 | £94,999 | | DEXTER | NICHOLAS | £70,000 | £74,999 | | DOWNIE | PAUL | £58,200 | £64,999 | | DUNCAN | GRAHAM | £65,000 | £69,999 | | DUNN | SHONA | £80,000 | £84,999 | | EVERTON | HELEN | £58,200 | £64,999 | | EVERTON | JANE | £70,000 | £74,999 | | EYKYN | GEORGE | £105,000 | £109,999 | | Name | First Name | Salary 1 | Salary 2 | |---------------|------------|----------|----------| | FERRARI | CESARE | £65,000 | £69,999 | | FLETCHER | GRAHAM | £58,200 | £64,999 | | FOLEY | MARK | £75,000 | £79,999 | | FOULDS | BRIAN | £65,000 | £69,999 | | HALL | ROBERT | £65,000 | £69,999 | | HARRIES | RICHARD | £70,000 | £74,999 | | HIGGINS | SUE | £135,000 | £139,999 | | HILL | DAVID | £70,000 | £74,999 | | KEAN | ANDREW | £65,000 | £69,999 | | KERSLAKE | BOB | £200,000 | £204,999 | | KNIGHT | KENNETH | £165,000 | £169,999 | | KUENSSBERG | DAVID | £70,000 | £74,999 | | LEDSOME | ROBERT | £75,000 | £79,999 | | LLEWELLYN | BENJAMIN | £58,200 | £64,999 | | LOCKHART | STEPHANIE | £58,200 | £64,999 | | MCGIBBON | SUSANNA | £95,000 | £99,999 | | MEGAINEY | CHRISTOPHER| £65,000 | £69,999 | | MOCKFORD | STUART | £65,000 | £69,999 | | MORGAN | ANDREW | £70,000 | £74,999 | | NEILSON | JAMES | £65,000 | £69,999 | | O'CONNOR | NEIL | £80,000 | £84,999 | | PROUT | DAVID | £130,000 | £134,999 | | RANDALL | SALLY | £58,200 | £64,999 | | REED | MICHAEL | £65,000 | £69,999 | | RIDLEY | SIMON | £80,000 | £84,999 | | ROSSINGTON | DAVID | £110,000 | £114,999 | | SCATES | DARREN | £110,000 | £114,999 | | SCHOFIELD | PETER | £130,000 | £134,999 | | SHELDON | CAMILLA | £58,200 | £64,999 | | SMITH | CHRISTOPHER| £70,000 | £74,999 | | SMITH | DAVID | £70,000 | £74,999 | | STANIER | RUTH | £75,000 | £79,999 | | STUBBS | MATTHEW | £65,000 | £69,999 | | TUKE | JOSEPH | £110,000 | £114,999 | | WATSON | JEREMY | £125,000 | £129,999 | | WHATMORE | ELIZABETH | £70,000 | £74,999 | | WHITE | PATRICK | £80,000 | £84,999 | | WINDERS | MICHAEL | £70,000 | £74,999 |
- 40 staff did not respond.
- 71 staff did not consent to disclosure of their details.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0185-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 3,
"total-input-tokens": 6667,
"total-output-tokens": 2797,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3214,
1
],
[
3214,
5188,
2
],
[
5188,
7395,
3
]
]
} |
2368a64aa880d740cfdfc0e139dfc34b2bb558bd | | Date Posted | Merchant | Settlement Amount | |------------|-----------------------------------|-------------------| | 02/04/2012 | DRI NUANCE | 549.99 | | 04/04/2012 | WWW.COMPROOM.CO.UK | 724.00 | | 23/08/2012 | IAP 2012 THAILAND | 598.21 | | 18/09/2012 | HOTEL NESTROY | 513.78 | | 19/09/2012 | WESTMINSTER SUSPEN 02 | 1,254.00 | | 01/11/2012 | CENTARA GRAND AT CTW | 517.01 | | 15/11/2012 | DON RUFFLES LTD | 3,834.00 | | 22/11/2012 | FAST KEY SERVICES LTD | 1,140.79 | | 22/11/2012 | LAMBDATEK | 1,697.52 | | 23/11/2012 | WESTMINSTER SUSPEN 02 | 1,254.00 | | 18/01/2013 | WWW.CLEVERBRIDGE.NET | 1,816.11 | | 23/01/2013 | SELTEK SOLUTIONS DIV O | 598.80 | | 11/03/2013 | ARGOS RETAIL GROUP | 840.95 |
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0186-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1657,
"total-output-tokens": 474,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1064,
1
]
]
} |
35f7f051e6f0a8d2395c56c3c4d9ec7a99a764b5 | STATISTICAL RELEASE
2010 UK GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, FINAL FIGURES
DECC today publishes final 2010 estimates of UK greenhouse gas emissions.
Greenhouse gas emissions - headline results
- In 2010, UK emissions of the basket of six greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol were estimated to be 590.4 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO₂e). This was 3.1 per cent higher than the 2009 figure of 572.5 million tonnes. Between 2009 and 2010 the largest increases were experienced in the residential sector, up 15.1 per cent (11.8 MtCO₂e), and the energy supply sector, up by 2.8 per cent (5.6 MtCO₂e). Emissions from all other sectors were relatively stable, compared to 2009 levels.
- Carbon dioxide (CO₂) is the main greenhouse gas, accounting for about 84 per cent of total UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2010. In 2010, UK net emissions of carbon dioxide were estimated to be 495.8 million tonnes (Mt). This was around 3.8 per cent higher than the 2009 figure of 477.8 Mt. There were notable increases in emissions from the residential sector, up by 15.8 per cent (11.8 Mt), and from the energy supply sector, up 3.1 per cent (5.8 Mt). Again, emissions from all other sectors were relatively unchanged from 2009.
- The overall increase in emissions has primarily resulted from a rise in residential gas use, combined with fuel switching away from nuclear power to coal and gas for electricity generation. In 2010, these factors mainly affected emissions of carbon dioxide, rather than other gases, and since CO₂ makes the largest contribution to the UK total, any change in CO₂ emissions is likely to drive a similar change in total emissions.
- All the sectoral breakdowns included in this statistical release are based on the source of the emissions, as opposed to where the end-user activity occurred. Emissions related to electricity generation are therefore attributed to power stations, the source of these emissions, rather than homes and businesses where electricity is used. The headline results are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 below. Note that the 2009 figures have been revised since the previous publication in February 2011; further details of this revision can be found later in this statistical release.
The time series for selected years since 1990 is shown in Table 10 towards the end of this statistical release.
**Table 1: Emissions of greenhouse gases (MtCO₂e)**
| | 2009 | 2010 | Change | |--------------------------|------|------|---------| | Total greenhouse gas emissions | 572.5 | 590.4 | +3.1% | | Net carbon dioxide emissions | 477.8 | 495.8 | +3.8% |
CO₂ emissions figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies; Total greenhouse gas emissions figures also include some Overseas Territories. Carbon dioxide emissions are reported as net emissions, to include removals from the atmosphere by carbon sinks. This also affects some of the other greenhouse gases, but to a lesser extent.
**Figure 1: Emissions of greenhouse gases, 1990-2010**
Coverage of emissions reporting
The basket of greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol consists of six gases: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride. These last three gases are collectively referred to as fluorinated compounds. In accordance with international reporting and carbon trading protocols, each of these gases is weighted by its global warming potential (GWP), so that total greenhouse gas emissions can be reported on a consistent basis. The GWP for each gas is defined as its warming influence relative to that of carbon dioxide. Greenhouse gas emissions are then presented in *carbon dioxide equivalent* units.
Carbon dioxide is reported in terms of *net* emissions, which means total emissions minus total removals of CO₂ from the atmosphere by *carbon sinks*. Carbon sinks are incorporated within the Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) sector, which covers afforestation, reforestation, deforestation and forest management. They are defined by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as “any process, activity or mechanism which removes a greenhouse gas, an aerosol or a precursor of a greenhouse gas from the atmosphere”.
Unless otherwise stated, any figures included in this release represent emissions within the UK and its Crown Dependencies (Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man).
Reporting of greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol is based on emissions in the UK, its Crown Dependencies, and those Overseas Territories (Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands, Gibraltar and Montserrat) that are party to the UK ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. This now includes emissions from direct flights between the UK and these Territories. The Kyoto Protocol also uses a narrower definition of carbon sinks than that applied for domestic UK CO₂ reporting, which therefore results in a slightly different total. These adjustments mean that the greenhouse gas basket reported for Kyoto differs slightly from the sum of the individual gases as shown.
Reporting of greenhouse gas emissions for the UK’s Carbon Budgets only includes emissions within the UK, and excludes both Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories.
A more detailed summary of the coverage and breakdown can be found in the data tables which accompany this release, which can be accessed via the Climate Change Statistics pages of the DECC website.
**Emissions by gas and source sector**
**Total greenhouse gases**
In 2010, 35 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions were from the energy supply sector, 21 per cent from transport, 15 per cent from both the residential and business sectors and 9 per cent from agriculture.
Since 1990, emissions from the energy supply sector and from business have reduced by 25 per cent and 21 per cent respectively. However, residential emissions have increased by around 11 per cent over the period. Emissions from transport were around the same level in 2010 as they were in 1990.
Details of changes over time in the main greenhouse gases are set out in the following sections of this statistical release. Details of emissions of fluorinated compounds, together with the full breakdown by gas, can be found in Table 10 towards the end of this release.
Table 2 and Figure 2 below show the breakdown of greenhouse gas emissions into the main source sectors.
**Table 2: Sources of greenhouse gas emissions, 1990-2010 (MtCO₂e)**
| Source | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | |-------------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| | Energy Supply | 273.4 | 235.8 | 220.1 | 228.7 | 221.9 | 198.7 | 204.3 | | Transport | 121.5 | 122.0 | 126.7 | 130.4 | 127.7 | 122.2 | 121.9 | | Residential | 80.8 | 82.3 | 90.1 | 87.8 | 83.4 | 78.1 | 89.9 | | Business | 113.2 | 108.2 | 111.3 | 105.3 | 100.3 | 89.0 | 89.0 | | Agriculture | 63.1 | 61.8 | 58.0 | 55.1 | 50.9 | 50.2 | 50.7 | | Waste Management | 45.9 | 40.0 | 29.3 | 19.0 | 17.6 | 17.1 | 16.5 | | Industrial Process| 54.4 | 44.9 | 24.6 | 18.2 | 16.3 | 10.2 | 10.9 | | Public | 13.1 | 12.8 | 11.6 | 11.1 | 9.4 | 8.3 | 8.5 | | LULUCF | 3.9 | 2.5 | 0.4 | -2.9 | -3.9 | -4.2 | -3.8 | | Total | 769.4 | 710.4 | 672.0 | 652.5 | 623.6 | 569.6 | 587.8 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
**Figure 2: Greenhouse gas emissions by source, 1990-2010**
*Source: AEA*
**Carbon dioxide**
Carbon dioxide accounted for about 84 per cent of the UK’s man-made greenhouse gas emissions in 2010. In 2010, 39 per cent of carbon dioxide emissions were from the energy supply sector, 22 per cent from road transport, 17 per cent from the residential sector and 15 per cent from business.
Since 2009, there has been an increase in emissions in some of the main sectors. Emissions from the residential sector have increased by 16 per cent, while emissions from the energy supply sector have increased by 3 per cent. Emissions from industrial processes are also up slightly, by 5 per cent, although this sector is relatively small in absolute terms. Emissions from the business sector and road transport are relatively unchanged since 2009.
There are a number of reasons for the increase in emissions between 2009 and 2010. The large increase in the residential sector resulted almost entirely from an increase in the use of natural gas. Residential emissions are heavily influenced by external temperatures, and 2010 was, on average, the coldest year since 1987. In particular, temperatures in both the first and last quarter of the year were very low; the first quarter was the coldest since 1987, and the last quarter was the coldest since at least 1970. This caused an increase in demand for space heating in 2010, which resulted in a significant increase in emissions from domestic gas use.
The increase in emissions from power stations was mainly because of technical problems at some nuclear power stations. In 2010, due to maintenance outages, there was less nuclear power available for electricity generation, and more coal and gas were used instead. In particular, Sizewell B, the largest nuclear power station, was offline for six months. This contributed to an increase of around 4 per cent in emissions from electricity generation between 2009 and 2010.
Since 1990, emissions from the energy supply sector have reduced by 19 per cent and business emissions have reduced by 32 per cent. However, emissions from the residential sector have increased by 10 per cent, while emissions from road transport have increased by 2 per cent over this period.
Table 3 and Figure 3 below show the breakdown of carbon dioxide emissions into the main source sectors.
**Table 3: Sources of carbon dioxide emissions, 1990-2010 (Mt)**
| Source | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | |-------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Energy Supply | 242 | 211 | 203 | 218 | 219 | 213 | 190 | 196 | | Road Transport | 108 | 110 | 115 | 119 | 120 | 116 | 111 | 111 | | Residential | 79 | 81 | 87 | 84 | 78 | 80 | 75 | 87 | | Business | 111 | 104 | 104 | 94 | 89 | 87 | 76 | 76 | | Other | 50 | 45 | 41 | 37 | 35 | 33 | 26 | 27 | | Total | 590 | 552 | 550 | 551 | 542 | 529 | 478 | 496 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories. Methane
Weighted by global warming potential, methane accounted for about 7 per cent of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2010.
In 2010, the main sources of methane were agriculture (44 per cent of the total) and landfill sites (36 per cent). Between 2009 and 2010 there was a small decrease (of 2 per cent) in total emissions of methane, primarily from the landfill waste sector.
Methane emissions in 2010, excluding those from natural sources, were 58 per cent below 1990 levels. Emissions from landfill have reduced by 66 per cent and emissions from agriculture by 20 per cent since 1990. Emissions from coal mines have also reduced significantly over the period, by 90 per cent.
Table 4 and Figure 4 below show the breakdown of methane emissions into the main source sectors.
Table 4: Sources of methane emissions, 1990-2010 (MtCO₂e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | |----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Agriculture | 22.4 | 21.6 | 19.9 | 19.3 | 18.6 | 18.2 | 17.9 | 18.0 | | Landfill | 43.1 | 37.5 | 27.2 | 17.0 | 16.3 | 15.8 | 15.3 | 14.7 | | Gas leakage| 8.5 | 8.1 | 6.7 | 4.9 | 4.7 | 4.4 | 4.3 | 4.2 | | Coal mines | 18.3 | 12.6 | 6.8 | 3.3 | 1.9 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 1.8 | | Other | 5.2 | 4.2 | 3.3 | 2.5 | 2.7 | 2.6 | 2.5 | 2.6 | | Total | 97.4 | 84.0 | 64.0 | 47.1 | 44.2 | 43.0 | 42.0 | 41.3 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories. Gas leakage also includes other emissions from the exploration, production and transportation of gas. Nitrous oxide
Weighted by global warming potential, nitrous oxide emissions accounted for about 6 per cent of the UK’s man-made greenhouse gas emissions in 2010.
Agriculture is the main source of these emissions, accounting for 80 per cent of the total, mainly from agricultural soils. Between 2009 and 2010, emissions from nitrous oxide remained relatively stable. There was a slight increase in industrial process emissions (of 11 per cent, but small in absolute terms), primarily due to increases in nitric acid production.
Nitrous oxide emissions fell by 48 per cent between 1990 and 2010. The largest reductions were in emissions from adipic acid production between 1998 and 1999 (down 95 per cent, 11 MtCO$\_2$e), which is reflected in the reduction in emissions from industrial processes between these years.
Table 5 and Figure 5 below show the breakdown of nitrous oxide emissions into the main source sectors.
Table 5: Sources of nitrous oxide emissions, 1990-2010 (MtCO$\_2$e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | |----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Agriculture | 35.5 | 34.9 | 33.3 | 31.2 | 28.8 | 28.6 | 28.2 | 28.6 | | Industrial process | 24.7 | 14.9 | 5.6 | 3.0 | 2.8 | 2.5 | 1.2 | 1.4 | | Road transport | 1.2 | 1.7 | 1.4 | 1.1 | 1.0 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.8 | | Other | 6.4 | 5.9 | 5.6 | 5.5 | 5.4 | 5.2 | 4.8 | 4.8 | | Total | 67.8 | 57.4 | 46.0 | 40.9 | 38.1 | 37.1 | 35.1 | 35.6 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories. Emissions from UK-based international aviation and shipping bunkers
Emissions from international aviation and shipping can be estimated from refuelling from bunkers at UK airports and ports, whether by UK or non-UK operators. Under the reporting guidelines agreed by the UNFCCC, these emissions are not included in the UK’s emissions total, but are reported as memo items in national greenhouse gas inventories. Parties to the UNFCCC are required to act to limit or reduce emissions from international services working through the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and International Maritime Organisation (IMO).
In 2010, emissions from international aviation fuel use were estimated to be 31.8 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent. This was 4.4 per cent lower than the 2009 figure of 33.3 million tonnes. Between 1990 and 2006, these emissions increased by around 130 per cent, although since 2006 they have been steadily falling. Nevertheless, in 2010 these emissions are still more than double the 1990 level. High altitude aviation also has a greenhouse effect over and above that of carbon dioxide alone, but this is not reflected in these estimates.
In 2010, emissions from UK international shipping bunkers were estimated to be 8.8 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent. This was 13.3 per cent lower than the 2009 figure of 10.1 million tonnes. Since 1990, emissions from UK shipping bunkers have been highly variable. There was an increase of around 18 per cent between 1990 and 1998, followed by a fall of 48 per cent between 1998 and 2002. Emissions then more than doubled between 2002 and 2008, but have since fallen by 20 per cent, and they are now at the same level as in 1990. It should be noted that UK operators purchase most of their fuel outside the UK.
Table 6 and Figure 6 below show the international aviation and shipping emissions series from 1990 to 2010.
**Table 6: Greenhouse gas emissions from UK-based international aviation and shipping bunkers, 1990-2010 (MtCO₂e)**
| Year | International aviation | International shipping | Total | |------|------------------------|------------------------|-------| | 1990 | 15.8 | 8.8 | 24.6 | | 1995 | 20.3 | 8.2 | 28.6 | | 2000 | 30.5 | 6.8 | 37.3 | | 2005 | 35.5 | 7.8 | 43.3 | | 2007 | 35.7 | 9.7 | 45.5 | | 2008 | 34.8 | 11.0 | 45.8 | | 2009 | 33.3 | 10.1 | 43.4 | | 2010 | 31.8 | 8.8 | 40.6 |
**Figure 6: Greenhouse gas emissions from UK-based international aviation and shipping bunkers, 1990-2010**
Revisions to the Inventory
The UK Greenhouse Gas Inventory is reviewed every year, and the whole historical data series is revised to incorporate methodological improvements and new data. This takes into account revisions to the datasets which have been used in its compilation, most notably the UK energy statistics published in the Digest of UK Energy Statistics (DUKES). It is therefore not appropriate to compare the Inventory from one year with that from another. However, the latest Inventory represents a single consistent data series going back to 1990, and this therefore allows year-on-year comparisons to be made. In preparing the 2010 Inventory, the most notable changes to the historical series since the 2009 Inventory was published are linked to new research which has become available in relation to a number of specific sectors, as follows.
Estimates of methane emissions from landfill waste, which were revised in the 2009 inventory to reflect new research available at the time, have now been further revised following additional investigation relating to this research. Inconsistencies were identified between the research results and how they had been fed through into the emissions estimates, and these have now been corrected. These emissions are now lower than previously estimated for all years from 1990 to 2003 and relatively unchanged for all years from 2004 onwards.
Estimated emissions of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) from refrigeration and air conditioning have been revised to reflect new research. As a consequence, we have moved from a modelling approach based on total refrigerant sales data to develop estimates based on factors such as numbers of equipment and refrigerants used. Other improvements include the addition of small emission sources such as heat pumps and marine transport refrigeration, and including estimates from non-greenhouse gas refrigerants such as ammonia and hydrocarbons. These emissions are now higher than previously estimated from 1998 onwards.
Finally, there were revisions to the estimates of emissions from refineries and other energy industries, relating to the use of data from the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS) and the UK Petroleum Industry Association (UKPIA) in place of data from the Digest of UK Energy Statistics (DUKES) for some specific fuels. In both cases, estimated emissions have been revised upwards across almost the entire time series.
All the revisions to the Inventory have resulted in revisions to the figures, for all years up to and including 2009. The total of all UK greenhouse gas emissions reported for the Kyoto Protocol in 2009 has been revised upwards from 566.3 to 572.5 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent. The figure for UK CO₂ emissions in 2009 has also been revised upwards, from 473.7 to 477.8 million tonnes. Comparing the 2010 figures with the 2009 figures published a year ago will therefore give a different year-on-year percentage change, but one which is incorrect and should not be used.
**Revisions from provisional estimates**
Provisional estimates of 2010 UK greenhouse gas and carbon dioxide emissions were published in March 2011, based on early estimates of energy consumption for the year.
At that time, it was provisionally estimated that total UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2010 would be 582.4 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent, which represented an increase of 3 per cent from the 2009 figure. Although the final 2010 figure of 590.4 million tonnes is around 1½ per cent higher than the provisional estimate, this still represents an increase from 2009 to 2010 of around 3 per cent. This difference is due to changes in the historical data series. Importantly, the trend anticipated by the provisional estimates has now been seen in the final figures.
It was also provisionally estimated that net UK carbon dioxide emissions would be 491.7 million tonnes, representing an increase of 4 per cent from the 2009 figure. The final 2010 figure of 495.8 million tonnes is around 1 per cent higher than the provisional estimate, but again, this does indeed represent an increase from 2009 to 2010 of around 4 per cent.
Differences between the provisional and final estimates arise from a combination of the range of uncertainty inherent in the provisional estimates (of the order of +/-1½ per cent), and revisions to other statistics on which these estimates were based.
**UK emissions reduction targets**
The UK has a number of targets, both international and domestic, for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
These can be summarised as follows:
**Kyoto Protocol target**
The Kyoto Protocol uses a base year which is comprised of 1990 for carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, and 1995 for fluorinated compounds. To meet its commitment under the Protocol, the UK has agreed a legally binding target to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 12.5 per cent below the base year level over the period 2008-2012.
In July 2007, on completion of the review of the UK Inventory, the UK’s Kyoto base year figure was set at 779.9 million tonnes CO₂ equivalent, based on the 2006 UK Inventory submission. This means that to meet the UK’s Kyoto commitment, greenhouse gas emissions must be below 682.4 million tonnes CO₂ equivalent on average per year over the first five year commitment period of the Protocol (2008-2012).
In accordance with this average yearly target, the Kyoto Protocol target for the UK was then set at 3,412 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent over the full five year period - this is now the UK’s *Assigned Amount*.
For more details of the UK’s Kyoto commitment, see the [UK Initial Report under the Kyoto Protocol](#).
**UK Climate Change Act**
This Act includes a legally binding target for the UK to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80 per cent below base year levels by 2050. It also establishes a system of binding five-year carbon budgets to set the trajectory towards these targets.
Like the Kyoto Protocol, the Act uses a base year which is comprised of 1990 for carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, and 1995 for fluorinated compounds. However, this base year figure differs from that used for reporting against the Kyoto Protocol in that the baseline is revised each year to incorporate revisions made subsequent to the UK’s Kyoto Protocol assigned amount having been fixed.
The Government set the first three carbon budgets in May 2009, covering the periods 2008-12, 2013-17 and 2018-2022. The fourth carbon budget, covering the period 2023-27, was set in June 2011. The first of these budgets requires that total UK greenhouse gas emissions do not exceed 3,018 million tonnes CO₂ equivalent over the five-year period 2008-12, which is about 22 per cent below the base year level on average over the period. The fourth carbon budget was set so as to require a reduction in emissions of 50 per cent below base year levels over the period 2023-2027, although this figure is now slightly below 50 per cent due to revisions to the base year figure.
Table 7 below shows details of the first four carbon budgets.
**Table 7: Summary of UK Carbon Budgets, 2008-2027**
| | Budget 1 2008-12 | Budget 2 2013-17 | Budget 3 2018-22 | Budget 4 2023-27 | |----------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------|------------------| | Base year (actual emissions) | 3018 | 2782 | 2544 | 1950 | | Equivalent average annual emissions (MtCO₂e) | 770.8 | 603.6 | 556.4 | 508.8 | | Percentage reduction below base year levels | 22% | 28% | 34% | 49% |
The levels of all four carbon budgets expressed as a percentage reduction have changed from the values which have been referred to previously. This is because the base year figure is not fixed, but is revised each year to incorporate revisions to the inventory.
Further details of how the Kyoto Protocol and Carbon Budget baseline emissions figures have been derived, can be found on the DECC website in the [Record of UK base year emissions](#) table. Emissions Trading
*Emissions trading results, including those from the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), are not published as National Statistics, and any results which incorporate emissions trading figures should therefore not be treated as National Statistics.*
Under the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol, three *flexible mechanisms* were established to provide for trading of national allowances and project-based credits by Governments and emitters. These are *International Emissions Trading*, the *Clean Development Mechanism* (CDM) and *Joint Implementation* (JI). International Emissions Trading allows Government-to-Government trading of Assigned Amount Units (AAUs) between developed (*Annex I*) countries. The CDM allows Annex I countries with a target under the Kyoto Protocol to fund carbon reduction projects in developing (*non-Annex I*) countries and earn carbon credits for the avoided emissions. JI allows Annex I countries to implement emissions reduction projects in other Annex I countries, generating carbon credits which can be used for compliance with targets by the investor country.
In reporting emissions reductions against all of its targets, the UK needs to take account of emissions trading through these flexible mechanisms. At the present time, the scope of the UK’s emissions trading does not extend beyond the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), although it should be noted that EU ETS participants may also use credits generated under CDM and JI projects, subject to certain limits, in order to comply with their obligations.
However, the Government will be able to include any units or credits generated through any of the Kyoto Protocol’s flexible mechanisms in its future assessment of the UK’s progress towards its emissions reduction targets.
The EU ETS operates as a *cap and trade* system, which means that, currently, any installation within the System in the EU is given an allocation of emissions allowances each year. If the installation’s actual emissions are above this initial allocation for the year in question, then the installation must either purchase allowances through the System, or bring forward some allowances from the following year’s allocation, so as to cover the deficit. Conversely, installations with a surplus of emissions compared with their cap are allowed to either sell allowances or carry them over into the following year’s allocation, thus providing a financial incentive to reduce emissions. As there is a finite limit of allowances in the System (i.e. the cap), any allowances purchased should come from installations which have reduced emissions.
The System is now in the last year of Phase II, covering the five year period 2008-2012. Final results are currently available for each year of Phase I, which covered the three year period 2005-2007, and also for the first three years (2008-2010) of Phase II. Phase III, which begins in 2013, will change some of the parameters of the system, but will not change the ultimate cap and trade basis of the EU ETS. In 2010, for the second consecutive year, the UK has been a net seller of allowances. This effectively means that installations between them either sold or carried over more emissions allowances than they purchased or brought forward. Taking emissions trading into account within the context of the UK’s reported emissions, this will affect the results by increasing the level of emissions by the amount of EU ETS allowances sold in the year.
It should be noted that at the end of Phase I, the UK Government sold a small number of unallocated allowances from the new entrant reserve on the open market. Since it would not have been appropriate to incorporate these sales in the 2007 results alone, they were spread equally over each of the three years in Phase I.
In November 2011, the Environment Agency published a report summarising the 2010 EU ETS results. Further details of the System can also be found at the EU ETS section of the DECC website.
Table 8 below shows the UK’s net trading position in each year since the System commenced in 2005. For example, in 2010 the UK sold allowances totalling 7.7 MtCO$\_2$e, which should be taken into account when reporting emissions against the Kyoto Protocol target.
**Table 8: EU ETS net trading position, 2005-2010 (MtCO$\_2$e)**
| | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | |------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Net purchases/(sales) by UK installations | 27.1 | 33.2 | 27.5 | 19.9 | (13.7) | (7.7) | | Net purchases/(sales) by UK Government | (1.9) | (1.9) | (1.9) | - | - | - | | Net UK purchases/(sales) | 25.2 | 31.3 | 25.6 | 19.9 | (13.7) | (7.7) |
It should be noted that, for the purposes of reporting for UK Carbon Budgets under the Climate Change Act, the figure for net UK purchases/(sales) in 2010 will be slightly lower, at 7.6 MtCO$\_2$e. This is due to differences in both the coverage of the Act and the way in which the annual cap in 2010 has been calculated.
Further details of progress towards the UK carbon budgets will be included in the annual statement of emissions, required under section 16 of the Climate Change Act. In respect of 2010, this must be laid before Parliament no later than 31st March 2012.
The statement will provide a clear and thorough explanation of how the “net UK carbon account” – which is what we use to determine compliance with the carbon budgets – was calculated, and what it amounts to. It will contain details of UK emissions and removals on a carbon budgets (i.e. UK only) basis, and the details of where carbon units have been used, in accordance with the methodologies contained in the Carbon Accounting Regulations 2009 and Carbon Accounting (Amendment) Regulations 2009. UK performance against emissions reduction targets
Performance measured against targets, incorporating the net EU ETS trading position, can be summarised as follows:
- UK emissions of the basket of six greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol were 23.3 per cent lower in 2010 than in the base year, down from 779.9 to 598.1 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent.
- For the purposes of carbon budgets reporting, UK greenhouse gas emissions were 23.0 per cent lower in 2010 than in the base year, down from 770.8 to 593.9 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent.
These results are shown in the context of the headline results in Table 9 and Figure 7 below. A more detailed summary of the results can also be found in Table 11 at the end of this release.
Table 9: Performance against emissions reduction targets
| | Base year emissions | 2010 Emissions | Change from base year | |--------------------------------|---------------------|----------------|-----------------------| | All greenhouse gases – Kyoto Protocol coverage (UK, Crown Dependencies & Overseas Territories) | Actual emissions (no allowance for trading) | 779.9 | 590.4 | -24.3% | | | Emissions with allowance for trading | 779.9 | 598.1 | -23.3% | | All greenhouse gases – UK Carbon Budgets coverage (UK only) | Actual emissions (no allowance for trading) | 770.8 | 586.3 | -23.9% | | | Emissions with allowance for trading | 770.8 | 593.9 | -23.0% |
Emissions are in million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent. Future updates to emissions estimates
On Thursday 29th March 2012 we will be publishing a breakdown of 2010 UK emissions by end-user sector and fuel type, to supplement the source sector breakdown published today.
On the same date we will also be publishing provisional estimates of UK greenhouse gas emissions for 2011 as National Statistics. This will coincide with the publication of Energy Trends, which will include the first estimates of 2011 UK energy consumption.
Further information and feedback
Any enquiries or comments in relation to this statistical release should be sent to DECC’s UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions Statistics and Inventory Team at the following address:
ClimateChange.Statistics@decc.gsi.gov.uk
Contact telephone: 0300 068 5583
The lead statistician for this publication is John Mackintosh.
Further information on climate change statistics, including Excel downloads of all the data used to compile this statistical release, can be found on the DECC website at:
http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/statistics/climate_change/climate_change.aspx Notes for Editors
1. A full set of data tables can be accessed via the Climate Change Statistics pages of the DECC website.
2. This Statistical Release and the related data tables are the first release of data from the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (NAEI) for 1970-2010, produced for DECC and the Devolved Administrations by AEA. Additional results will be released as they become available, including a full report to be published later in the year. For further information on the UK Greenhouse Gas Inventory, see the NAEI website.
3. Further information about the Kyoto Protocol can be found on the UNFCCC’s website.
4. Results from the EU ETS are not currently published as National Statistics. They have therefore not been incorporated in the headline results. Further details of the European Union Emissions Trading System can be found at the EU ETS section of the DECC website.
5. There are uncertainties associated with all estimates of greenhouse gas emissions. Although for any given year considerable uncertainties may surround the emissions estimates for a pollutant, it is important to note that trends over time are likely to be much more reliable. For more information on these uncertainties see the page on How UK emissions of greenhouse gases are measured on the DECC website.
6. Under the Climate Change Act, the annual statement of emissions for 2010 must be laid before Parliament and published no later than 31st March 2012. This will give details of the net UK carbon account for 2010, which is used to determine compliance with the targets and budgets under the Act.
7. The two headline measures included in this statistical release, "UK greenhouse gas emissions" and "Emissions from UK-based international aviation and shipping bunkers" have previously been reported as two of the indicators supporting the UK Government's Sustainable Development Strategy. The full Sustainable Development indicator set was last updated in 2010, and a new set of indicators are currently under development to support the Government’s approach to mainstreaming Sustainable Development, with reporting requirements to be confirmed in due course.
8. Revisions were made to previously published figures in the 2009 greenhouse gas inventory for a number of reasons, including the following:
Details of the research which has led to revisions of our estimates for methane from landfill waste can be found on the Publications sections of the DECC website.
Details of the study which has led to revisions of our estimates of emissions of HFCs from refrigeration and air conditioning can be found on the Publications sections of the DECC website.
The latest UK energy statistics, including revisions to earlier years’ data, can be found in the 2011 Digest of UK Energy Statistics. 9. Detailed UK temperature data can be found on both the Met Office website and the Energy Statistics section of the DECC website.
10. When emissions are measured on this basis, UK emissions account for around 2 per cent of the global total, based on a range of estimates produced by the UN, the IEA, the World Resources Institute and the EIA, amongst others.
11. Similar results for non-greenhouse gas atmospheric pollutants, covering the period 1970-2010, were published by Defra in December 2011.
A National Statistics publication
National Statistics are produced to high professional standards set out in the National Statistics Code of Practice. They undergo regular quality assurance reviews to ensure they meet customer needs. Table 10: UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1990-2010, headline results
Greenhouse gas emissions: actual emissions in tonnes
| | Units (tonnes) | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | |----------------------|---------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| | Net CO₂ emissions | Million | 590.3 | 552.0 | 550.5 | 562.1 | 544.9 | 554.6 | 555.0 | 551.2 | 549.4 | 541.8 | 529.0 | 477.8 | 495.8 | | (emissions minus | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | removals) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Methane (CH₄) | Million | 4.6 | 4.0 | 3.0 | 2.8 | 2.7 | 2.4 | 2.3 | 2.2 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 2.0 | 2.0 | 2.0 | | Nitrous Oxide (N₂O) | Million | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | | Hydrofluorocarbons | Thousand | 0.98 | 2.22 | 4.70 | 5.34 | 5.82 | 6.54 | 6.83 | 7.36 | 7.76 | 7.96 | 8.33 | 8.48 | 8.60 | | (HFC) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Perfluorocarbons | Thousand | 0.20 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | | (PFC) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Sulphur hexafluoride | Thousand | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.08 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | | (SF₆) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Greenhouse gas emissions: weighted by global warming potential (million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | |----------------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| | Net CO₂ emissions | 590.3 | 552.0 | 550.5 | 562.1 | 544.9 | 554.6 | 555.0 | 551.2 | 549.4 | 541.8 | 529.0 | 477.8 | 495.8 | | (emissions minus | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | removals) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Methane (CH₄) | 97.4 | 84.0 | 64.0 | 58.7 | 55.8 | 50.0 | 48.5 | 47.1 | 45.8 | 44.2 | 43.0 | 42.0 | 41.3 | | Nitrous Oxide (N₂O) | 67.8 | 57.4 | 46.0 | 43.4 | 41.6 | 41.1 | 41.8 | 40.9 | 38.8 | 38.1 | 37.1 | 35.1 | 35.6 | | Hydrofluorocarbons | 11.4 | 15.3 | 9.3 | 10.2 | 10.7 | 11.9 | 11.1 | 12.0 | 12.7 | 13.0 | 13.6 | 13.9 | 14.3 | | (HFC) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Perfluorocarbons | 1.4 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.2 | | (PFC) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Sulphur hexafluoride | 1.0 | 1.2 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.7 | | (SF₆) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Kyoto greenhouse gas | 766.4 | 708.4 | 671.5 | 676.4 | 655.7 | 660.1 | 659.9 | 654.7 | 650.3 | 640.9 | 626.7 | 572.5 | 590.4 | | basket | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Notes
1. Figures for each individual gas include the Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry sector (LULUCF), but exclude emissions from UK Overseas Territories.
2. Kyoto basket total differs slightly from sum of individual pollutants above as the basket uses a narrower definition for LULUCF, and includes emissions from UK Overseas Territories, as well as emissions from direct flights between the UK and these Territories.
3. The entire time series is revised each year to take account of methodological improvements in the UK emissions inventory.
4. Emissions are presented as carbon dioxide equivalent in line with international reporting and carbon trading. To convert carbon dioxide into carbon equivalents, divide figures by 44/12.
5. Figures shown do not include any adjustment for the effect of the EU Emissions Trading System (EUETS), which was introduced in 2005.
6. Carbon dioxide emissions are reported as net emissions, to include removals from the atmosphere by carbon sinks. This also affects some of the other greenhouse gases, but to a lesser extent. Table 11: UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1990-2010, progress towards the Kyoto Protocol and Carbon Budgets Targets
| Kyoto Protocol greenhouse gas target | Baseline | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | |-------------------------------------|----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | No allowance for emission trading | | | | | | | | | | | | All greenhouse gases (including net emissions/removals from LULUCF) | 779.9 | 766.4| 708.4| 671.5| 654.7| 650.3| 640.9| 626.7| 572.5| 590.4| | Percentage change from baseline | -9.2% | -13.9%| -16.1%| -16.6%| -17.8%| -19.6%| -26.6%| -24.3%| | | | EU ETS | | | | | | | | | | | | Net purchases/(sales) by UK | 27.1 | 33.2 | 27.5 | 19.9 | -13.7| -7.7 | | | | | | installations | | | | | | | | | | | | Net purchases/(sales) by UK | -1.9 | -1.9 | -1.9 | - | - | - | | | | | | Government | | | | | | | | | | | | Net UK purchases/(sales) | 25.2 | 31.3 | 25.6 | 19.9 | -13.7| -7.7 | | | | | | With allowance for emissions trading| | | | | | | | | | | | All greenhouse gases (including net emissions/removals from LULUCF) | 779.9 | 766.4| 708.4| 671.5| 629.5| 619.0| 615.3| 606.8| 586.2| 598.1| | Percentage change from baseline | -9.2% | -13.9%| -19.3%| -20.6%| -21.1%| -22.2%| -24.8%| -23.3%| | |
| United Kingdom Carbon Budgets | | | | | | | | | | | |------------------------------------|----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | No allowance for emission trading | | | | | | | | | | | | All greenhouse gases (including net emissions/removals from LULUCF) | 770.8 | | | | | | | | | | | Percentage change from baseline | -19.3% | -26.3%| -23.9%| | | | | | | | | EU ETS | | | | | | | | | | | | Net purchases/(sales) by UK | 19.3 | -13.5| -7.6 | | | | | | | | | installations | | | | | | | | | | | | Net purchases/(sales) by UK | - | - | - | | | | | | | | | Government | | | | | | | | | | | | Net UK purchases/(sales) | 19.3 | -13.5| -7.6 | | | | | | | | | With allowance for emissions trading| | | | | | | | | | | | All greenhouse gases (including net emissions/removals from LULUCF) | 770.8 | | | | | | | | | | | Percentage change from baseline | -21.8% | -24.6%| -23.0%| | | | | | | |
Notes
1. Kyoto base year consists of emissions of CO₂, CH₄ and N₂O in 1990, and of HFCs, PFCs and SF₆ in 1995. Includes an allowance for net emissions from LULUCF in 1990.
2. Emissions are presented as carbon dioxide equivalent in line with international reporting and carbon trading. To convert carbon dioxide into carbon equivalent, divide figures by 44/12.
3. UK Carbon Budgets were introduced in 2008. Figures include emissions solely from the UK and exclude emissions from Crown Dependencies and UK Overseas Territories. Figures include the Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry sector (LULUCF).
4. The Kyoto Protocol target includes emissions from the UK, Crown Dependencies and UK Overseas Territories. The target uses a narrower definition for the LULUCF sector.
5. The entire time series is revised each year to take account of methodological improvements in the UK emissions Inventory. However, the baseline used for the Kyoto Protocol is fixed and therefore does not change when methodological changes are made to the Inventory.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0187-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 20,
"total-input-tokens": 58947,
"total-output-tokens": 14241,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
2006,
1
],
[
2006,
3569,
2
],
[
3569,
6218,
3
],
[
6218,
7730,
4
],
[
7730,
10679,
5
],
[
10679,
12284,
6
],
[
12284,
13862,
7
],
[
13862,
15496,
8
],
[
15496,
17291,
9
],
[
17291,
20273,
10
],
[
20273,
22486,
11
],
[
22486,
24846,
12
],
[
24846,
27910,
13
],
[
27910,
30639,
14
],
[
30639,
32223,
15
],
[
32223,
33304,
16
],
[
33304,
36105,
17
],
[
36105,
36843,
18
],
[
36843,
41963,
19
],
[
41963,
46442,
20
]
]
} |
9f6fc207ce6b78ae2e71fdf21a99083b4e8c60b8 | LONDON COUNCILS EUROPEAN SOCIAL FUND CO-FINANCING PROGRAMME
2013-2015
Tendering Prospectus April 2013 Deadline for tenders: 12 noon, 24th May 2013
Please note that any additional guidance or clarification on any points in this prospectus will be posted on London Councils and London Councils-Europe websites at the end of each week until 17th May 2013. It is important that you check the website to make sure that you do not miss any additional guidance.
www.londoncouncils.gov.uk Contents
01. Foreword by the Mayor of London ................................................................. 4
02. Introduction .................................................................................................. 5
03. Eligibility criteria ......................................................................................... 7
04. Submitting a tender ..................................................................................... 8
05. Cross cutting themes: Gateway criteria ....................................................... 21
06. Partnership working .................................................................................... 25
07. Participant eligibility ................................................................................... 25
08. Project activities and results ....................................................................... 28
09. Participant target group and project specifications .................................... 35
10. Brent – Specification 1 ............................................................................... 36 Project Specification 1: Employment support for residents with mental health issues – (Priority 1.1) ........ 40
11. Enfield – Specification 2 ........................................................................... 43 Project Specification 2: (Priority 1.1) .......................................................... 47
12. Hackney – Specification 3 ......................................................................... 50 Project Specification 3: (Priority 1.1) .......................................................... 53
13. Havering – Specification 4 ......................................................................... 56 Project Specification 4: (Priority 1.1) .......................................................... 59
14. Islington – Specification 5 .......................................................................... 66 Project Specification 5: (Priority 1.1) Self-employment ................................ 68
15. Redbridge – Specification 6 ....................................................................... 72 Project Specification 6: (Priority 1.1) .......................................................... 78
16. Sutton – Specification 7 ............................................................................. 81 Project Specification 7: (Priority 1.1) .......................................................... 84
17. Project duration .......................................................................................... 87
18. Soft outcomes ............................................................................................ 87
19. Added value ............................................................................................... 88
20. Financial information .................................................................................. 89
21. Publicity arrangements .............................................................................. 93
22. Assessment process ................................................................................... 94
23. Appeals ....................................................................................................... 96
24. Monitoring and reporting on your project ............................................... 96
25. Payment arrangements .............................................................................. 97
26. Key initiatives ............................................................................................ 98
27. Contacts ..................................................................................................... 108 Annex 1. Sustainable development: Further information .................................. 110 Annex 2. Checklist – Health cross cutting theme ............................................ 112 Annex 3. Core Participant MI Requirement (ESF and Match) ............................ 113
28. Foreword by the Mayor of London
Foreword by the Mayor of London
I am delighted to invite you to apply for the eighth London Councils European Social Fund (ESF) tendering round, which will invest £1.2 million ESF and match-funding from seven London boroughs to support disadvantaged groups into employment.
London is the engine of the UK economy and a world class city, driving productivity and growth. It is a magnet for the best and brightest talent across the globe. Despite this, many disadvantaged Londoners have not shared equally in the city’s prosperity. Significant pockets of worklessness contrast with highly successful and profitable labour markets. Londoners do not always have the skills or opportunities to share in the successes of London’s economy.
London remains a city of incredible opportunity. This round of ESF funding comes at the right time to support Londoners to compete for and access the jobs and opportunities our economy creates.
At the heart of all commissioning and delivery of employment and skills services is the desire to support people find and sustain employment and to progress at work. This prospectus will support over 800 unemployed and economically inactive Londoners with training and other assistance, in order to boost their skills and prospects for employment. By the end of the programme around 250 Londoners will have sustained employment.
I wish you all the best with your applications.
Boris Johnson
Mayor of London 2. Introduction
Welcome to the prospectus for the eighth round of the London Councils European Social Fund (ESF) Programme 2007-2013. This programme is part of the 2007-2013 London European Social Fund Programmes, which since 2007 and following the review of the Greater London Authority (GLA) powers, has been under the strategic direction of the Mayor. It is administered on his behalf by the GLA’s European Programmes Management Unit (EPMU).
The London ESF Regional Framework for 2011-13(^1) was developed by EPMU with guidance from the Mayor’s Office, and sets the strategic direction for ESF in London. Activities are aligned with national and regional skills and employment priorities including the Mayor of London’s Economic Development Strategy(^2).
The Framework informs the plans of the five London Co-financing Organisations (CFOs), who are responsible for match funding and allocating ESF. In order of size, the CFOs are:
- Skills Funding Agency
- Department for Work and Pensions (DWP)
- Greater London Authority (GLA)
- London Councils
- National Offender Management Service (NOMS)
Each CFO has prepared an ESF Co-financing Plan which sets out the activities, outputs and results that contribute to the employment and skills priorities in the Regional ESF Framework. The contact details of the other CFOs are listed at the end of this document at section 27.
The Mayor’s Office has put greater emphasis on minimising duplication between Co-financers in London to ensure that ESF funding is used in the most effective way and to add value to existing provision. The five co-financing organisations, work closely to develop complementary programmes of activity for the region.
Since 2000, the ESF has been a key part of the EU's Lisbon strategy for growth and jobs. It supports the EU's goal of increasing employment by giving workless and disadvantaged people the training and support they need to enter jobs. By focusing on those most in need of help, it contributes to policies to reduce inequality and build a fairer society. The ESF also equips the workforce with the skills needed by business in a competitive global economy (http://www.dwp.gov.uk/esf/).
The ESF was set up to improve employment opportunities in the European Union and so help raise standards of living. It aims to help people fulfil their potential by giving them better skills and better job prospects. This Programme combines funds from the seven London boroughs and the European Social Fund and enables London Councils to use its strategic position to enhance borough level employment and training projects. The participating boroughs are using the additional ESF to add value to the work they are
(^1) http://www.london.gov.uk/esf/regional-framework (^2) www.london.gov.uk/who-runs-london/mayor/publications/business-and-economy/eds doing and the borough specification prospectus list the strategic borough-level priorities the additional ESF funding will support.
The 2007-13 ESF Programme has two main priorities with a further three sub priorities within each of them.
**Priority 1 – Extending Employment Opportunities**
- **Priority 1.1** Improving the employability and skills of the unemployed and economically inactive people
- **Priority 1.2** Employment and Skills activities targeted at young people who are not in education, employment or training (NEET) or at risk of becoming NEET
- **Priority 1.3** Community Grants programme for those groups furthest from the labour market
**Priority 2 – Creating a Skilled and Adaptable Workforce**
- **Priority 2.1** Increasing the Number of Employees with Improved Basic Skills
- **Priority 2.2** Increasing the Number of Employees with Improved level 2 skills
- **Priority 2.3** Increasing the Number of Employees with Improved level 3/4 skills
Please refer to the funding table in Section 6 of the London ESF Regional Framework for 2011-13[^3] for more information about the CFOs operating under each priority. Under the current round, London Councils and the participating boroughs welcome tenders from organisations and partnerships that are strategic and show links with other programmes. Projects should be innovative and add value to mainstream provision.
Table 1. Programme ESF and Match Funding Breakdown
| Borough(s) | Borough Match Funding | ESF | Total | |------------|-----------------------|-----|-------| | Brent | £100,000 | £100,000 | £200,000 | | Enfield | £100,000 | £100,000 | £200,000 | | Hackney | £125,000 | £125,000 | £250,000 | | Havering | £125,000 | £125,000 | £250,000 | | Islington | £50,000 | £50,000 | £100,000 | | Redbridge | £100,000 | £100,000 | £200,000 | | Sutton | £50,000 | £50,000 | £100,000 | | **Total** | **£650,000** | **£650,000** | **£1,300,000** |
The funding in this table reflects the total amount of funding leveraged towards the programme from the participating boroughs and the ESF and is inclusive of Management and Administration fees.
3. Eligibility criteria
London Councils will only fund organisations that are:
- **Constituted**: Organisations funded by London Councils must have a constitution or governing document that is signed and dated, and defines how the organisation will operate. A governing document can be a formal constitution, a memorandum or articles of association.
1. Public or Local authority bodies can bid for contracts, however the body bidding must be separate and have appropriate ethical walls from the body awarding the funding.
- **Able to deliver the work solely in the borough(s) listed in the tender specification**: Unlike the main London Councils programme, organisations will be expected to work in one borough only, unless specified in the tender.
- **Financially solvent**: Organisations funded by London Councils must not have liabilities that are more than their current assets.
- **Able to begin delivery of project activity from July 2013**: Unless otherwise stated in the tender.
London Councils will not assess funding proposals from any organisation that does not meet the conditions listed above. However please note that this round is not restricted to voluntary sector providers.
______________________________________________________________________
4 London Councils will ensure that the scoring process will be open, transparent and fair and that ethical walls will be applied to the scoring and assessment of tenders. 4. Submitting a tender
a. Before you begin writing your tender
There are certain conditions for this funding that are outlined in the following sections. Please read this guidance carefully before completing the tender form and consult one of our advisors (please see Section 27) if anything is unclear.
If your organisation has previously applied for funding from London Councils, you are welcome to reapply in this round. However, please note that some changes have been made to the tender form and to the process itself, as well as to the way in which London Councils will fund projects under this round. London Councils wishes to ensure that projects chosen under this programme will deliver the targets outlined in its ESF Co-financing Plan, which, along with this prospectus, can be found on the London Councils website. Therefore, London Councils has set clear guidelines on the type of project it will fund for each target group. If you have any queries or need further guidance or support in putting together your tender, please contact one of the London Councils grants officer. If you would like discussion and advice on your project idea and possible help with partnership forming, you may also contact London Voluntary Service Council (LVSC). It may be necessary to make an appointment to speak to LVSC and applicants are treated on a first come first served basis. All contacts are listed in Section 27.
Tenders for the London Councils ESF Co-financing Programme 2013-2015 have to be submitted through an online application process:
https://www.GrantRequest.com/SID_668?SA=SNA&FID=35058
Deadline for all tenders: 12 noon, 24th May 2013 Tenders submitted after the deadline will not be considered for any reason.
Leave yourself enough time to complete, review and amend the information you provide, upload the required documents and submit your online form before the deadline. Deadline days are often busy and you may not be able to reach a member of London Councils staff if you have any technical queries with submitting the form.
All tenders must be submitted through the online form and the Annexes provided on the Programme’s website, which, together with the prospectus and plan, can be downloaded from here:
http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/services/grants/esf/default.htm The online tender form includes guidance for each section you need to complete and Annexes you need to upload.
Each scored sections will indicate the maximum available score. Please note that the risk register and track record attachments are also scored as standalone sections. All other attachments are not scored separately however they will support some of the scored sections and will be considered during the assessment process.
The person scoring your application can only assess the information stated in your application. You must assume that they know nothing about your organisation, or the needs of your community, so be clear about what activities you are going to do and for whom.
b. Things to remember about your online form
Once you have created a log-in to our form, you can save your on-line application at any point and come back to it later.
Once you have saved your on-line application you can open and change the form from any computer.
c. Help: If you need further assistance/information.
- Firstly read this guidance section.
- Secondly refer to the FAQs (these will be updated regularly) http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/services/grants/esf/docs.htm
- Thirdly if you still have not been able to find an answer then please email us. Your question and our response will be posted on the FAQs page. Please send your questions before 20 May 2013 as we may be unable to answer questions after that date.
d. Completing your online application form
i. Step one: Create an account login and access the online form
Click on the following link https://www.GrantRequest.com/SID_668?SA=SNA&FID=35058 to create a login and access a new form, (or copy and paste into your internet address bar).
Now you will see this screen, where you create your account and login.
- Click on ‘New Applicant’
- You will be taken to a new page
**New Applicant?**
An account allows you to access your saved and submitted applications at any time, also allows us to send you a submission confirmation e-mail and notify you if additional information is necessary to process your application.
- E-mail
- Confirm E-mail
- Password (minimum of 5 characters)
- Confirm Password
- Click on the button marked ‘continue’ and you will move straight into the online form.
You must remember your email address and password as you will need it every time you log into your account. You can save and close your form, by clicking on ‘save and finish later’ now and at any time and return to the form by accessing your account.
To return to your account (where you can access forms already started) click on: https://www.GrantRequest.com/SID_668?SA=AM
ii. Step two: Complete the online form
This part of the guidance includes details on how to complete the online tender form.
1. Technical help for using the online form
The information below will take you through how to use the online form to answer the questions.
For most of the form you are asked to simply type your answers into a box under the question.
Sometimes you are required to tick a box, select from options or upload a document. The guidance on completing each section is included within the question, upload area or the set template.
You will only be able to write in plain text within the answer boxes, therefore you will not be able to use formatting features (e.g. bolding, underlining, resizing and spacing). You can structure your text by adding line breaks and empty rows. Please bear in mind that scorers will have large amounts of information to process, and that it is in your interest to be as clear and concise as possible.
Mandatory fields
You must answer all questions marked with a purple diamond. If you do not answer these questions you will not be able to submit your application.
Spell check
Where you see a red tick you can click on it to perform a spell check.
Word limit
There is a word limit to some questions. Where this is the case the counter will show you how many words are left from the total allowed. Please note that row breaks will not count toward the word count.
Attachments
You will be required to upload a number of attachments to your tender form.
Before you can attach the documents online you need electronic versions of your documents saved onto your computer.
Retain the original format and file extension for all the set templates. If you don’t have electronic copies of other documents to be uploaded (e.g. Constitution) then you can scan the paper copies and save them in a folder on your computer. The maximum size for all attachments combined is 50MB. Files with .exe .com .vbs or .bat will not upload.
Uploading a document is similar to attaching a document to an email.
- To do this click on the ‘browse’ button next to the attachment you wish to upload.
- This will take you to documents on your pc/network. Search for the correct folder.
- Select the correct document and click ‘open’.
- Now click on the button ‘upload’.
- If you do not click ‘upload’ your document will not be uploaded to the form.
- If you have uploaded the wrong document simply click on ‘remove’.
2. How to save, print and return to your form
Saving your work
Once you are into the question part of the form you can save what you’ve done and come back to it at any point by pressing the ‘save and finish later’ button.
We strongly advise you to save your form as you go along. If you have not saved and your computer crashes you will lose all your work.
Once you have saved your work you will be taken to this screen (below). Simply click on your proposal and carry on working.
To return to your form Click on the following link. [https://www.GrantRequest.com/SID_668?SA=AM](https://www.GrantRequest.com/SID_668?SA=AM)
Log into your account using the email and password you created at the log in stage. You will see the screen above. To go back to your un-submitted application make sure the drop down menu states ‘In Progress Applications’ click onto the link to go back to your form.
If you have submitted your form you can still view it as a link under the ‘Submitted Applications’ in the drop down menu.
**To print**
Click Save and finish, come back to your form. Click on button ‘printer friendly version’ to print.
Please note you always need to click ‘save’ before printing your application so that your most up to date version prints out.
Do not send us your printed version; simply use it to check your work. **London Councils can only accept online applications** (unless in exceptional circumstances in which a group has written in advance (by 20 May 2013) to seek permission).
Additionally if you are a disability led organisation and need additional time to complete the tender process, London Councils need to be informed of this by the 20 May 2013 where they will take a decision. Where an extension is awarded London Councils will do this in writing before the standard submittal deadline. Requests for extensions received after 20 May 2013 will not be considered.
### 3. Completing the form – questions
The online tender form is divided into five main sections:
1. Introduction;
2. Your organisation;
3. Your project summary;
4. Your project delivery;
5. Declaration.
#### 1. Introduction
The form starts with introductory text covering the assessment of applications. Please read this carefully. The information below will give you guidance on the information required to answer each question.
**Documents you will need:**
- The first page of the form tells you exactly which documents you will need to upload as part of your tender form;
- There are 16 required documents to complete and upload to your tender.
- For some of the attachments, a set template has been created (marked with asterisk on the Introduction page’s attachment listing). You will be required to use these templates and you can download them from the tendering round’s website.
- Most attachments are compulsory to complete. These are marked with the sign;
- Some attachments only apply if your proposed project has delivery partners
The following documents need to be completed and attached before submitting this online form:
- A signed and dated copy of your constitution or memorandum and articles of association;
- A copy of your public and employer’s liability insurance certificates;
- Details on additional delivery partners (if you have more than 5 delivery partners)\*;
- Draft partnership agreements (where you intend to work in partnership);
- Target groups template\*;
- Employer support letters;
- Track record template\*;
- Profile form\*;
- Project’s structural chart;
- Risk register\*;
- A copy of your equal opportunities policy;
- A copy of your sustainable development policy or statement confirming that one will be implemented by the end of the first year of delivery;
- A copy of your health and safety policy;
- Budget template\*;
- A copy of your most recent signed audited accounts;
- Your current year budget and estimated next year budget.
\*download the template you have to use from tendering rounds’ website
Failure to provide the documents listed below can result in your application not being scored.
______________________________________________________________________
**2. Your organisation**
Give details of the lead organisation applying for the funding on this page of the tender form. You will also need to upload:
- a signed and dated copy of your constitution or memorandum and articles of association and
- a copy of your public and employer's liability insurance certificates on this page.
3. Your project summary
Provide general information about your project on this page. This includes the:
- project title;
- specification you are applying for;
- delivery start and end dates;
- project summary;
- delivery partner details (including two attachments if applicable);
- contact details for referee.
4. Your project delivery
This page includes the detailed description of your project, including your:
- target groups;
- employers you intend to work with (with Employer support letter attachments);
- proposed activities, outputs and results;
- track record (attach completed template);
- Delivery profile (attach completed template);
- Project management (including structural chart);
- Risk register (attach completed template);
- Cross cutting themes (relevant policies attached);
- Financial information (attach competed budget template, most recent signed audited accounts, current year budget and estimated next year budget).
5. Declaration
This is the final page of the form.
You must select ‘yes’ from the drop down menu if you agree that:
- You have read and understood the information contained in the London Councils Tendering Prospectus;
- the proposed activity is within the objects of your organisation's constitution;
- London Councils will share the application form and its contents with the participating boroughs and the City of London Corporation;
- this application has the support of your organisation's governing committee/board of trustees/senior management;
- all the information you have supplied is accurate; the information you have supplied about the proposed service is a realistic indication of what your organisation could achieve.
**IMPORTANT:**
You must select ‘YES’ for your tender to be assessed.
**Requirements**
We are not permitted to consider any additional information received after the application deadline so please make sure that you have included all the required information and attachments.
If you are aware that submitting an application may give rise to a potential conflict of interest please inform the London Councils. A conflict of interest maybe where you are related to a member or staff officer of London Councils or you have privileged information about London Councils that places you at an unfair advantage over other applicants in the application process.
London Councils is subject to the requirements of the Freedom of Information Act 2000. You should be aware that the information you submit may be subject to a request for information from the public and London Councils may be required to provide information to external parties.
**Data protection**
Part or all of the information you give us will be held on computer and used for statistical purposes. It will also be used for the administration of applications and awards. We may provide copies of the information in confidence to individuals or organisations that are helping us assess applications or monitor funding. We may also be required to provide information contained in your application if we receive freedom of information request.
**Finishing the form**
- Now you are at the end of the form you may:
- Save & Finish Later
- Review & Submit
- You may wish to save and finish later. You may wish to print a copy to proof read it and save it.
- When you are ready to submit – click on ‘review and submit’
- If you have left any mandatory fields blank, or submitted the wrong kind of information (for example text in a box that can only accept numbers) a list of errors will appear in red as below. The red warning sign and red text will then appear next to any field that you need to amend.
- **IMPORTANT:** Once you have amended the fields, click on the button marked ‘update’ or the changes will not be saved.
- Once you have amended the fields and clicked ‘update’ a final version will appear for you to review.
- Once you are happy click on the button marked ‘submit’
- You will be taken to your account page, where you will see the following message. Important information
You must click ‘submit’ to send each application.
You will automatically be sent a confirmation email with a copy of your submitted form.
If you do not receive a confirmation email, you have not submitted your online form correctly.
Please check and submit again.
Once submitted you cannot amend your form but you can view it through your account. 5. Cross cutting themes: Gateway criteria
Cross cutting themes (CCTs) are issues that affect the whole of project delivery and are considered to be central to delivering a high quality and accessible project. The cross cutting themes are equal opportunities, sustainable development and health. Applicants will be expected to demonstrate their project’s impact with regard to the CCTs. The questions relating to equal opportunities, sustainable development and health are known as ‘gateway’ criteria because you will be expected to achieve a minimum score on these questions in order for your application to proceed into full assessment. The minimum score that you must achieve on each part of these questions is shown in the tender form. **If your project does not achieve the minimum score on each criterion, your application will be rejected and will not be considered for funding under this round.**
Scorers will note where the borough specification requires higher or lower targets than those listed here, where there is conflict the borough specification applies.
**Equalities and diversity**
Equality and diversity or equal opportunities (EO) best practice focuses on securing the equality of all groups in society and seeking to alleviate the disadvantages that are experienced by some of them. Commitment to equality and diversity should be demonstrated in all aspects from project planning and implementation through to monitoring and evaluation.
You should tell us how your project will raise awareness of and implement equal opportunities with participants and project staff. Tell us the practical ways that you will do this that are related to your project and its activities. You are also required to provide a copy of your EO policy at the application stage. This will allow assessors to take into account how EO considerations run through every aspect of the work you undertake, from representation and decision making through to delivery. You will be expected to demonstrate your track record and impact with regard to EO.
If your tender is successful, you will be expected to establish robust equality indicators at the outset of your project. These indicators will be built into your contract and London Councils will monitor you against your progress in meeting them. You will be expected to demonstrate in your regular monitoring returns to London Councils how you have implemented EO in your project to date.
There are a number of programme-level equalities targets that should be mirrored at project level. You should demonstrate how you will contribute to the following targets:
- **Women:** It is anticipated that women will represent 51% of all participants on the programme;
- **Older people:** It is anticipated that 18% of participants will be 50 or over. Where necessary, training should address issues where age is a barrier to employment. Appropriate individual support should be provided;
- **Ethnic minorities:** At least 60% of participants at the programme level are expected to be of ethnic minority origin. People from some ethnic minority groups are over-represented amongst those who are workless. This is in part a result of discrimination in recruitment that frequently occurs when there are seen to be language or cultural differences between the recruiter or current staff and the applicant. Equality of opportunity for the participants will be supported by appropriate employability training and advocacy to prospective employers;
- **Disabled people:** It is expected that 22% of participants will be disabled people or people with long-standing health conditions(^5). All providers will be expected to make provision for access and appropriate support for disabled people wherever feasible. Projects which target disabled people will be expected to work with employers to develop sustained employment for disabled people. Organisations in receipt of London Councils funding are required to indicate how they respond to the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act;
- **Lone parents:** It is expected that 12% of all participants on the programme will be lone parents.
London Councils expects all projects to provide child and dependent care for participants as required in order to enable them to access the programme.
Further guidance on the Equalities and Diversity cross cutting theme is available via:
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/ef/resources/gender-equality-and-equal/
There are four ESF Equality and Diversity Good Practice Guides available via the link above. These focus on:
- Disability
- Gender
- Race
- Age
It is recommended that you read these booklets and incorporate their guidance when designing your project.
(^5) Long standing health conditions refer to conditions that are expected to last, or have lasted, for a year or longer, and that make it difficult for the person to do the things that most people do on a fairly regular and frequent basis. Sustainable development Sustainable development includes social, environmental and economic aspects. You will be expected to have considered and integrated each of these strands into your project. The London Councils programme will contribute to the UK strategy for sustainable development *Securing the Future*.
The nature of the London Councils ESF Borough Co-financing Programme and the activities it will fund will contribute to sustainable development by achieving progress that recognises the needs of everyone and assists participants towards social inclusion and independent living through employment. Your tender should demonstrate how you will ensure long-term outcomes for participants.
Your tender should demonstrate an understanding of the need for good environmental performance and management in keeping with the ethos and achievement of sustainable development in the UK. All projects will be required to consider impact in relation to: energy, water, waste, purchasing and transport. You should also demonstrate how you will integrate relevant aspects of sustainable development into courses you run and/or use the environment as a medium for training delivery.
You are required to provide a copy of your sustainable development policy at the application stage. If your organisation doesn’t have a sustainable development policy, please include a statement with your tender explaining that the organisation does not yet have a sustainable development policy. Any organisation selected for London Councils ESF funding that does not yet have a sustainable development policy will be required to implement such a policy by the end of the first year of delivery.
Further guidance on the sustainability cross-cutting theme is available via:
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/esf/resources/sustainable-development/
More information on this theme can be found at Annex 1
Health
The London ESF Regional Framework has health as a cross-cutting theme and co-financing organisations (CFOs) are responsible for incorporating and promoting this theme within their programmes. All ESF funded providers must also ensure that health is integrated within the scope and provision of their projects.
The aim of the health theme is to support ESF providers to maximise health outcomes for their participants in practical ways. Health and work are inextricably linked; skills and good jobs can reduce health inequalities and improve the health of all Londoners.
There is now clear evidence that:
- good health should improve an individual’s chances of finding and staying in work and of enjoying the consequent financial and social advantages; • work has an inherently beneficial impact on an individual’s state of health. Work is known to be good for mental health and to aid recovery even for those with the most severe of conditions; and
• unemployment is known to be detrimental for mental health. The longer people are out of work the harder they find it to return and the greater the impact on their health and well-being(^6).
A health performance management framework (PMF) and accompanying guidance has been developed to support London’s ESF providers to incorporate and report on progress with this theme.
The PMF is specifically designed to enable ESF providers to:
• identify how their projects are impacting on health and well-being at the planning and early delivery stage;
• identify actions that they could take to improve the potential positive impacts and make arrangements to reduce any unintended negative impacts;
• identify deliverables that can be monitored throughout the lifetime of the project to measure impacts on health and well-being; and
• provide a means of measuring the impact of their project on health and well-being.
Providers will be expected to complete the PMF within the first 3 months of starting delivery of their project and send it to their CFO contract manager to check for review. Contract managers will monitor providers against their self-assessment annually to identify progress and discuss further development.
The HCCT Guidance and PMF and appendices are available here: http://www.london.gov.uk/esf/cross-cutting-themes/health
Further information about tackling health inequalities in London is available from the Greater London Authority’s website:
http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/health
The checklist in Annex 2 will help you identify ways in which your organisation can integrate the health cross cutting theme in project delivery.
(^6) National Mental Health Development Unit (2010) Employment and mental health, Briefing two. London: Dept. of Health 6. Partnership working
London Councils wishes to support effective partnership working in project delivery, some of the tender specifications even have partnership working as a mandatory activity. In particular, we would encourage delivery organisations to work with partners where complementary expertise is required to deliver a full package of support. For example, where specialist training outside of the provider’s core competencies is required, we would prefer that this provision be outsourced to an experienced specialist provider, rather than providers attempting to establish a new training resource.
We expect that providers will have established, or be in the final stages of establishing, partnerships prior to submitting their application. All providers intending to work in formal partnership (i.e. where the lead partner will be paying other partners) must submit a draft partnership agreement with their tender which formalise roles and responsibilities within the partnership.
As a minimum, a partnership agreement should contain sections on:
- who the partners are
- roles and responsibilities of each partner
- the timescale for delivery
- equal opportunities (that the partner must ensure equality of opportunity in line with the lead partner’s equal opportunities policy and London Councils and ESF requirements)
- the other cross-cutting themes: sustainable development and health
- monitoring (including which information the partner is required to keep and how often they are expected to report to the lead partner)
- termination
- finance and payments (including how much money will be paid to the partner organisation by the lead organisation, what the money will cover)
- deadlines for reporting to the lead partner
- audit (that the partner organisation may be subject to an audit in connection with the project, and that the all records pertaining to the delivery of the project are still auditable until 31st December 2022)(^7)
- publicity
This type of agreement ensures that project delivery by project partners takes place as discussed and ensures that each partner is clear about what it needs to achieve as part of the project.
7. Participant eligibility
Participant eligibility to the London Councils ESF Borough Programme 2013-15 is subject to a number of conditions, unless explicitly stated in the tender specification the following ESF criteria will apply.
(^7) Please note that it is the lead partner’s responsibility to ensure it holds all records relating to any aspect of delivery of the project (including those of partners) until December 2022. This is in line with ESF rules on document retention Funded projects who apply under ESF priority 1.1 specifications may only enrol participants who:
- Live within the specified borough(s),
- Or where participants are homeless their registered Jobseeker’s Allowance (JSA) office or temporary/ sheltered accommodation is within the specified borough.
*Participants who engage onto the project under these conditions, but then ‘move out’ of the specified borough may continue to be supported through the programme. (Individuals who live outside the specified borough(s) should be referred to other appropriate support services.)*
- Have the right to work in the UK.
- Who are not on another ESF funded employment programme where the claimable financial output/result is the same,
- This includes ESF employment programmes delivered under the National Offender Management Service (NOMS), Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), Greater London Authority (GLA), London Councils and Skills Funding Agency frameworks.
- Are not already mandated on to the Work Programme.
- Or are about to be mandated onto the Work Programme or Jobcentre Plus (JCP) approved provision, and the JCP advisor has not approved enrolment onto this programme as an exclusive alternative to the Work Programme.
- Are workless, i.e. working less than 8hrs a week,
- This applies to unemployed participants, those who are economically inactive including those not in receipt of benefits.
- Participants in receipt of JSA or any participant who is working less than 8hrs a week is defined as being unemployed on this programme
- Participants not in receipt of JSA and who are not working are defined as being economically inactive on this programme.
- Are not in full time education (i.e. studying less than 16 hours a week).
- Are aged 20+. (The programme has some discretion to work with 18-20 year olds, where they are not served by NEET provision), please see the specification for which you are applying for details.
The programme will aim to complement existing provision so in all cases participants cannot be accessing existing Department for Work and Pensions (e.g. the Work Programme and ESF families with multiple problems programme) or Skills Funding Agency (e.g. pre-NEETs and NEETs programmes) mainstream provision.
Funded projects will be expected to, and be monitored on their ability to demonstrate how they will work with JCP across the whole borough(s) to complement the Work Programme and other ESF provision and avoid the duplication and competition between services. Project specific requirements
Individual specifications will list any additional requirements for participant eligibility particular to that borough or specification at a later stage in this document. These requirements will be in addition to or supersede those described above. 8. Project activities and results
London Councils has consulted with the participating boroughs and other CFOs on the types of activities, outputs and results they expect from their ESF funded projects. In order to avoid duplication, participating boroughs will fund projects that work with specific target groups and in specific geographical areas.
All applicants must demonstrate that their project has a focus on progression, and for the majority of participants supported under Priority 1.1 this will be towards employment.
Priority 1.1 Improving the employability and skills of unemployed and economically inactive people.
- Projects tendered under this priority will primarily have an employment focus. Applicants should demonstrate not only that they understand the needs of the participants, but also that the training and support to be provided are relevant to employer needs.
- The aim of this funding round is to move individuals closer to and into the labour market, through a range of support. It is recognised that not all participants will be able to move directly into employment at the end of the project so there is also a focus on progression to further education and training. Where employment (including self-employment) is a realistic target for individual participants, this is the preferred outcome.
Providers should make clear on the application form the specification against which they are tendering and should provide responses to all the activities listed within the specification. Please note that only one project will be funded under each specification and partnership approaches to this provision are encouraged.
The total number of tender opportunities and specifications are listed in Section 9 at later stage in this document. The maximum project value is listed in each specification. Please see Section 20 (financial information) of this document for further details on how London Councils will pay providers.
Project Activities:
All providers should include the following activities in their offer to participants:
| Activities group | Activity | |---------------------------|-----------------------------------------------| | Needs assessment | Initial needs assessment | | | Review of needs and objectives | | | Information advice and guidance | | | Better off in work calculations | | Soft skills development | Communication skills development | | | Confidence building | | | Enhanced problem solving skills | | | Ability to work in team | Work ethic development Improved positive attitude
Specific skills Job specific skills improvement
pre-employment support Job search / Job brokerage Interview techniques Practical advice on work routing and travel to work Advice on self-employment
Access to other services Advice on access to other services Signposting
Other support Childcare / Care for dependent Travel support Other support
In-work support In-work support (including support for work placement and voluntary work)
Providers should also check the project specification for any other activities required by the commissioning borough. The will include, but are not limited to the skills and full qualifications listed below:
| Activities group | Activity | |------------------|----------| | Basic skills | Literacy | | | Numeracy | | | Information and communication technologies (ICT) | | ESOL | entry 1 | | | entry 2 | | | entry 3 | | | level 1 | | | level 2 | | | below level 1 |
Highest level of qualification Outputs/ results for payment: All payments on the London Councils ESF Borough Programme 2013-15 will be made based on the delivery of pre-specified outputs and results. There are a number of standardised outputs and results for delivery across all specifications. These are explained below. However, it should be noted that some boroughs will also have specified outputs and results specific to their borough. For details of these and the unit costs associated with them, please consult each specification individually, (available in a separate document).
Standardised Outputs
Number of participants receiving support (IAG, job search, mentoring, training) On the London Councils ESF Borough Programme 2013-15, payments are not made for enrolments. Instead, the first payment a project receives will be made against participants who receive measured hours of support most commonly this will be a 6 hour milestone. Providers therefore may enrol as many participants as they wish to or have capacity for, however they will only be paid up to the total amount allocated for each payable output. London Councils’ ESF programmes’ remit is to assist the furthest from the labour market and this means that for a positive intervention the majority of participants would need six or more hours of support.
Please note:
- The hours of support is a milestone which, when passed, allows the project to claim a payment. London Councils requires providers to respond appropriately to participants’ needs; those who need a longer intervention in order to secure success should be accommodated and supported effectively throughout.
- The support milestone will not include the time taken to register the participant and complete the enrolment form. Time spent doing the induction, needs assessments, action plans and giving information, advice and guidance may be counted. Class work or other group sessions may not be counted if the milestone has been specified as one-to-one sessions only.
Work placements Work placements are time-limited interventions, giving participants’ experience of real-life work situations in order to assist them in developing skills, understanding work environments and the expectations of employers. There should be a progression towards paid employment, but the participant should not receive financial compensation for their work (though they may gain financial support with out of pocket expenses e.g. travel, childcare etc.). They should include a structured on-placement training/work plan which takes into account both participant and employer needs and on-placement support to both employer and participant should be provided.
Work placements must be for a fixed period of time totalling not less than 30 hours, over a period of time not exceeding 12 weeks. This can include volunteering as long as it meets the criteria outlined above.
**Submission of a final evaluation report** A final, externally conducted evaluation report will be required for all projects funded by the London Councils ESF Borough Programme 2013-15. Standardised Results
Results can only be claimed once participants leave the project.
**Participant gaining employment within thirteen weeks of leaving the project**
A payment will be made for participants who gain employment within thirteen weeks of leaving the project.
To be claimed, employment must be for 8 or more hours each week, unless otherwise defined in the specifications. This may be working for an employer (where their National Insurance is paid directly from their wages) or in self-employment (where people generally pay their National Insurance themselves). Where self-employment is claimed evidence of HMRC registration, and evidence of National Insurance contributions / proof of trading must be provided.
‘Leaving your project’ in this instance marks the date that the participant left the ESF project, after this time no further ‘hours of support’ can be recorded against a paid outcome. However contact and support to participants is expected to be maintained for as long as the participant feels it is necessary and to ensure that the progression is maintained.
**Participant in employment sustained for 26 weeks**
A further payment will be made for those participants who sustain their employment for a defined length of time. Please note that not all boroughs have chosen to support all of the results.
All sustained employment results must be achieved by the dates stated within each tender specification.
Employment does not necessarily need to be with the same employer for the whole period, but all employment must have clear evidence. It is possible that a participant can have breaks in their employment, however for each of the sustained results a minimum number of weeks is required, but again these must be achieved by the dates stated within each tender specification.
- 26 week milestone: The participant must be in employment for at least 26 weeks of the 32 weeks since starting employment (6months).
**Participants progressing to further education or training**
A payment may be made for participants who undertake further education or training within 13 weeks of leaving your project. Please note that not all boroughs have chosen to support this result. ‘Leaving your project’ in this instance marks the date that the participant left the ESF project, after this time no further ‘hours of support’ can be recorded against a paid outcome. However contact and support to participants is expected to be maintained for as long as the participant feels it is necessary and to ensure that the progression is maintained.
______________________________________________________________________
8 Employment outcomes can be claimed for participants that enter employment whilst receiving support from the project or within 13 weeks of their last intervention with the project. Leaving a project marks a stage in the participant’s progression and should not be a marker for the end of project support to the individual or employer. This result cannot be claimed within the organisation or partnership for activities that were listed as part of the project. Referrals internally or to a delivery partner may be claimed for activities outside the scope of the project (as defined within your tender) where added value can be clearly demonstrated.
Further education or training:
- can include formal academic or vocational education and less formal skills development training (including soft outcomes);
- can be claimed at any time within 13 weeks of leaving the project;
- can be in full-time work-based learning (including apprenticeships, Entry to Employment and NVQ learning (however it is more likely that a work-entry result will be claimed);
- must add value to the ESF project activities (i.e. is outside the scope of the ESF project) and must help the participant to progress towards their ultimate vocational goals as set out in their Individual Action Plan;
Please note that a referral to the Work Programme will not be considered as a claimable progression for a further education or training result. Also note that a further education or training result and an in employment result cannot be claimed for the same participant.
**Participants achieving a functional skills qualification**
This result reflects a participant improving their reading, writing, numeracy or information and communication technology skills, in a formalised way. Additional qualifications may be considered but these will be subject to London Councils and the Boroughs discretion.
All qualification results must be achieved by the dates stated within each tender specification and evidence needs to have been collected to prove the qualification was achieved.
**Participant tracking and on-going support**
Successful projects will be expected to maintain support and track participants on the programme.
Projects will need to explain within the tender document their methods and proposal for the support and tracking of participants and details of any in-work support or employer interventions they will deliver. Notes for all applicants
All projects should:
- demonstrate a clear understanding of the needs of the target groups listed in the specifications
- demonstrate how planned provision is appropriate to meet employer need (where applicable)
- demonstrate relationships with named employers that will lead to employment for participants
- show clearly how they will ensure they will deliver the target numbers of outputs and results
- demonstrate that participant progression is integral to the design of the project
- demonstrate how employer input has been included into the development and delivery of the project
- show a well thought-out approach to childcare / replacement social care issues including clear links to local providers and/or regional or national strategies
- demonstrate links with other relevant agencies or providers
- include better off in work calculations when designing projects
- show clear links to sources of employment (including flexible and self-employment) and providers of further education and training activity
- demonstrate a track record of providing successful employment advice, including self-employment
- show that they will offer appropriate follow-up support to allow participants to move into, and sustain, employment successfully
Providers should make clear on the application form the specification against which they are tendering and should aim to provide all the activities listed within the specification.
A glossary of all the key terms is also available from the DWP’s ESF website available here: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/esf/resources/glossary/. Here it defines for example what a ‘participant’, ‘provider’ & ‘basic skills’ are, where you use these terms in your tender you should be consistent with these definitions. 9. Participant target group and project specifications
This section sets out information on the types of participants this programme will target. The London Councils ESF Co-financing Programme aims to support a number of specific target groups that fall within wider target groups listed in the London Regional ESF Framework.
The table below indicates the provisional allocation of funding for each project specification. The number of projects, participants and outcomes for each specification and the activities that are required are detailed in section 8.
Definitions for the standardised project payable outputs and results are listed previously in section 8, there may be additional payable results described in the specification.
Please note: Both the amount of funding and the number of projects are indicative and may change once the tenders received have been assessed and appraised.
Provisional allocation of funding, by specification
| Specification | Number of projects to be funded | Available amount (£) | |---------------|---------------------------------|----------------------| | Brent | 1 only | £190,000 | | Enfield | 1 only | £190,000 | | Hackney | 1 only | £237,500 | | Havering | 1 only | £237,500 | | Islington | 1 only | £95,000 | | Redbridge | 1 only | £190,000 | | Sutton | 1 only | £95,000 | | | | **£1,235,000** | 10. Brent – Specification 1
Strategy Tackling unemployment is a longstanding Brent Council priority. The Brent Borough Plan 2010-2014 sets the clear policy context for tackling unemployment across Brent. ‘Reducing Unemployment and Low Incomes’ is identified as a key priority, stating:
“Brent is one of the country’s most deprived areas, with many individuals and families financially vulnerable or living in poverty. We will:
- Focus on those who have been out of work for longest and provide them with the right skills and experience to gain employment and provide specialist support to those with a disability;
- Aim to reduce the numbers claiming out of work benefits to meet the London average while raising income levels, by 2014”
This policy statement is supported by the Council’s Regeneration Strategy for Brent 2010-2030, which identifies three priorities, one of which is:
“To increase income and employment levels of Brent residents, concentrating on those most in need.”
Brent has a long and successful history of direct intervention in the labour market – most recently through Brent in2 Work which was established in 2002 and by 2005 was placing 1,000 workless Brent residents into jobs per annum through a combination of bespoke job brokerage, direct delivery, partnership working, and an intensive focus on developing and delivering innovative solutions to the needs of Brent’s diverse communities. By 2010 external resources funding the project had reduced with only a skeleton service remaining.
Last year in light of the current economic climate, the Council commissioned work to establish a new model of employment, with focus on:
- An underlying principle of working towards employment outcomes, with a focus on working with those people who are furthest from the labour market
- An approach which integrates properly those services and initiatives which have access to workless residents – most obviously housing, Brent Adult and Community Education Service, health and social care, and working with DCLG funded troubled families initiative – to fully engage this client group. The approach will need to support positive outcomes across those services and initiatives.
- Interventions that focus on filling gaps in the market, supporting workless residents who currently do not have specialist access to help them enter the labour market.
As part of this review the research highlighted a lack of provision for supporting residents with mental health problems into employment. A key priority in the council’s current draft Health and Wellbeing strategy is to ‘improve mental wellbeing throughout life’ with an ambition that employment will play a role in helping people recover. The council currently has a target of 8% of mental health service users on the Care Programme Approach being in employment. This target is monitored by the council’s Adult Social Services team and reported internally as part of the council’s performance management process. The Council has identified and allocated resources for activity which offers employment support to people with mental health problems. Under the new Employment and Enterprise team that is currently being developed to sit within the Council’s Regeneration and Major Projects department, this new activity will help deliver the team’s robust set of objectives:
- To enable more excluded residents to access and benefit from services;
- To enable more excluded residents into sustained employment;
- To increase opportunities for progression in employment;
- To derive greater value from existing employment-related expenditure/services;
- To maximize the social value of council (and supply chain) employment opportunities.
**Mental Health in Brent**
Mental health remains the largest single cause of morbidity in Brent. It affects one in six of the adult population and one in ten children and young people. Brent is ranked 16th highest in the terms of mental health needs among the London boroughs. Modelled estimates suggest that six Brent wards (Kilburn, Harlesden, Stonebridge, Willesden Green, Kensal Green and Mapesbury) had significantly high needs compared to England. There are approximately 4,040 adults in Brent with mental illness receiving incapacity benefits, with Brent having a higher claimant rate per 1,000 of working age population than the London average (Brent 2013).
Mental health is associated with a wide range of poorer physical and mental health outcomes, including significantly increased risk of earlier death, social exclusion and economic hardship. Mental health issues are often stigmatised, which can delay seeking help and recovery. Data from the Network of Public Health Observatories shows that rates of access to adult specialist mental health services per 100,000 population are low in Brent, however for those who are in contact with specialist services the rate of in-patient admission is high (4th highest in the country).
Increasingly medical research is pointing to the psychological benefit employment brings in the treatment of mental illness and national surveys have concluded that the majority of people with mental health problems (70-90%) consistently say that they want to work. The following project description and proposed project activity sets out the Council’s intention to deliver employment support for people with mental health issues. Population Brent is an outer London borough situated to the north-west of the capital. It has a population of 311,215, consisting of approximately 110,286 households based on the 2011 Census. With a population density of 72 people per hectare, it is the most densely populated outer London borough.
Brent is the second most ethnically diverse borough in the country, with 64% of the population from a BAME background. The largest BAME groups being Asian or Asian British: Indian (18.6%), Black or Black British: African (7.8%), and Black or Black British: Caribbean (7.6%) (Brent 2013).
56% of the Brent population was born outside the UK, the highest proportion for a borough in the UK. In just the two years between 2007 and 2009, 9% of Brent's population arrived in the UK. This same proportion of new arrivals had previously taken a decade from 1991-2000. Over 100 languages are estimated to be spoken in Brent, with over 1 in 5 households declaring in the 2011 Census that no one in the household has English as a main language.
Based on school population data, the ethnic composition of the school population has unsurprisingly increased. Pupils from Somalia, Eastern Europe, Iraq and Afghanistan have significantly increased, mirrored by a decrease in the proportion of white British pupils.
Geographical targeting Participants can be recruited from anywhere in Brent, provided that they are Brent residents.
Labour market Despite areas of relative affluence, levels of deprivation in parts of the borough are stark. According to the 2010 Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD), Brent is the 35th most deprived local authority in England, and on a worsening trend (81st most deprived in 2004, and 53rd in 2007). Persistent and entrenched deprivation is concentrated in a few neighbourhoods largely in the south of the Borough, with six of these (Harlesden, Church End, Stonebridge, Chalkhill, South Kilburn and St Raphaels) amongst the ten percent most deprived in the country. Indeed one ward, Stonebridge, is one of just two wards nationally that scores in the worst 5 percent of the country in all of the domain indicators for IMD.
Child poverty levels in the borough are similarly high. Nearly 34 percent (22,720) of children in Brent are deemed to live in poverty and at risk of this negatively impacting a child’s educational attainment, life chances, health, and safety. Brent is one of only 29 boroughs in the country that has one child in every five living in severe poverty. Lone parent households, teen parents and pregnant teenagers, and children living in workless households, have been identified as the main risk factors to child poverty in Brent (Brent 2013).
Of the working age population across Brent over 13,000 are now unemployed (9.3%), which is significantly higher than the London and national figures. 43,100 (25%) are economically inactive, and 31,360 (14%) are claiming out of work benefits. Within the borough’s most deprived neighbourhoods these figures are as high as 12.4%, the borough average is 4.5% (Brent 2013). A significant concern in Brent is the number of young people out of work, accounting for 5.5% of 18-24 year olds. Worryingly higher numbers of young people are remaining unemployed for more than 12 months.
This is further reinforced by a CBI employer survey(^9) conducted in 2010 the findings of which were as follows:
- Only 46% of employers currently rate the competency levels of staff as ‘good’
- 57% of employers are not satisfied with the time management skills of school leavers
- 46% are dissatisfied with the business and customer awareness of graduates
- 52% of employers are concerned about literacy of the current workforce while 49% are concerned about numeracy
**Sources of match funding** Match funding for this specification comes from Brent Council core funding.
______________________________________________________________________
(^9) CBI/EDI Survey 2010 Project Specification 1: Employment support for residents with mental health issues – (Priority 1.1)
Project description and overview of requirements This project will deliver an innovative and tailored employment and training programme to support Brent residents with mental health needs. The project aims to fill an identified gap in the Council’s employment provision by offering residents with mental health needs support to enter the labour market, and in doing so improve outcomes for the individual.
The provider will have excellent relations with the Community Mental Health Team in Brent and the Council’s Working with Families team to set up effective systems for the referral of individuals. The provider will deliver the service to this traditionally excluded group by providing a personalised approach, one which is sensitive and tailored to the individual. They are expected to have experience in employment brokerage, working with employers to secure employment and/or apprenticeship opportunities, for participants.
The project should:
- deliver an innovative individually tailored approach to employment support which responds to the specific needs of Brent residents with mental health needs
- deliver end to end support to residents consisting of initial assessment, action planning, job/training search and post-employment (aftercare) support once in employment
- identify and refer residents to training provision which have learning outcomes that support entry into employment
- deliver a job brokerage service by engaging with employers to identify employment and/or apprenticeship opportunities for residents
- work with job seeking residents with diagnosed mental health issues (as known to the Brent Community Mental Health team), as well as job seeking residents who may not be clinically diagnosed but present a mental health need to our Working with Families team
The provider must have:
- experience of delivering innovative employment support in Brent, or similar local authority areas, for people with mental health needs
- excellent understanding of the mental health provision in the borough, with a good understanding of mental health services provided by the Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust, and the various mental health teams delivering within it. The provider must consider how they will establish links with the suitable teams, and how this project will contribute and complement their existing services
- in-depth knowledge of other mental health organisations across the borough and good working relations with them to share knowledge and make referrals as required
- good understanding of the council’s Working with Families initiative and its outcomes, and the council’s delivery plan for it. The provider is expected to outline how they will establish links with the Working with Families team to deliver employment support to families/individuals with mental health issues
- excellent links with employers
- be familiar with, and willing to assist in delivering, the Council's key strategic documents and performance indicators around employment (see above)
- access to premises to deliver the service, with the flexibility of being able to deliver from suitable co-locations
**Suggested strategic partners**
- Central and North West London NHS Foundation Trust
- Brent Community Mental Health Team
- JobCentre Plus
- Specialist local agencies supporting people with mental health needs, e.g. Brent Mind, Brent Mencap
- Brent Council’s Early Help Family Support Team (DCLG Working with Families project): This team has been developed to deliver the Early Help Family Support Service which aligns a range of specialist services to ensure that families get the right help, at the right time. | Specification – Required outputs, results and unit costs | |----------------------------------------------------------| | **Number of projects to be funded and Borough** | 1 - London Borough of Brent | | **Project Timescale** | **Delivery period** | **Start** | **End** | | | **Final Evaluation** | July 2013 | 30/06/2015 | | | | | 31/07/2015 | | **Outputs for payment** | **Number** | **Unit cost** | **Total** | **Must be achieved by** | | Number of participants receiving 6+ hours of support (IAG, job search, mentoring, training) | 142 | £313 | £44,446 | 31/12/2014 | | Number of participants achieving a full vocational qualification | 88 | £400 | £35,200 | 30/06/2015 | | Submission of final evaluation report | 1 | £2,336 | £2,336 | 31/07/2015 | | **Results for payment** | **Number** | **Unit cost** | **Total** | | Number of participants in employment within 13 weeks of leaving the project | 68 | £879 | £59,772 | 31/12/2014 | | Number of participants in sustained employment for 26 weeks (6M) | 34 | £1,419 | £48,246 | 30/06/2015 | | Maximum funding available | - | - | £190,000 |
11. **Enfield – Specification 2**
**Introduction to the borough**
Enfield, although classified as an outer London borough, has levels of deprivation that are associated with the characteristics of many Inner London boroughs. Enfield has seen a bigger rise in the proportion of working age residents claiming out of work benefits of any London Borough since 2001. In the last ten years, all Edmonton wards (in the south eastern-most corner) have seen an increase in the proportion of working age adults claiming key out of work benefits, despite already having a relatively high claimant count a decade ago. As such there is clearly a growing issue with worklessness in the borough. Additionally older people out of work (50-64) are struggling to find new employment with individuals in this group most likely to be long-term claimants.
Economic inactivity in the borough is particularly high, with almost a third of all working age residents currently economically inactive. This includes some groups, such as early retirees and the long term sick who are not interested in finding work, but around 16,300 individuals in this category have declared in the Annual Population Survey that they would like a job. This suggests there is a need to re-engage this group, addressing individual barriers to work and bringing a substantial number of these residents towards economic activity. With incoming welfare reform likely to hit lone parents and large families hard, the large proportion of economically inactive women who cite looking after a family as the reason for their inactivity is a particular concern. A shift towards highlighting and encouraging flexible employment options and self employment should also be explored further in order to offset the impacts of the benefits cap and the introduction of universal credit.
Enfield remains committed to supporting its most vulnerable residents through its vision to make Enfield a better place to live and work, delivering fairness for all, growth and sustainability and strong communities. Schemes which have been most successful have focused on providing a bespoke service to each client, offering a range of services such as specialist benefits advice, condition management support for people with a mental or physical health problem, skills support, mentoring and appropriate referral. Thus the approach intended through this programme is focused on supporting people according to individual needs to improve their long term as well as immediate needs.
**Strategy**
Enfield Council set up a Worklessness Commission to explore the anatomy of unemployment in the borough and examine the range of programmes running locally to address worklessness and how successfully they are meeting the needs of local residents. There are already several schemes aimed at the 16-24 age group (both through DWP statutory and commissioned provision and other ESF provision), so it is recommended that this programme focus on older workless residents.
Enfield Council has been named as a Pathfinder Council, one of the 4 London boroughs to implement the Housing Benefit Cap Reform from 1 April 2013 and had already established system to work closely with the households affected, mostly lone parents who are by and large Income Support Claimants.
Below are links to a number of documents that set out the Council’s strategic approach to economic development and further information about Enfield’s key strategies
Enfield Child Poverty Assessment Population The following population characteristics are relevant to this specification.
- White UK ethnic group is 40.5%
- The next largest groups are Other White (18.2%) and Black African (9.0%)
- The non UK born population is 35.1% of the total with Turkey being the most prominent country of birth at 4.5%
- The number belonging to the Muslim faith doubled in 10 years, representing 16.7% of the population in 2011
- 28% of households in Enfield have one or more adults whose main language is not English, while 14.1% of households have no adults whose main language is English (Enfield 2013)
Households While total households increased by 9% from 2001 to 2011 the number of lone parent households with dependent children increased by 71% – a far higher rate of increase than any other London borough and the 2nd highest increase in the country. In 2011, Enfield had the 3rd highest proportion of such households in the whole of England. There was also a large increase in ‘Other households with dependent children’ and this type was 20th highest in England & Wales at 2011 (Enfield 2013).
There has been very substantial growth in the number of households in the private rented sector – up 103% in 10 years – higher than the national growth rate and far higher than across London. More than a fifth of all households in Enfield were in the private rented sector in 2011. These residents, particularly where they are economically inactive, are the most likely to feel the impact of Welfare Reform and may struggle to retain their home if they do not access employment, and soon.
The proportion of households in owner occupation fell from 70.7% at 2001 to 58.8% at 2011 Workless households with dependent children
23.1% of all households in Enfield with dependent children have no adult in employment. This is the 12th highest rate in England and 6th highest in London.
Lone parent households now make up 16.7% of all households (up from 11.3% at 2001) and 34% of all households with children. Enfield ranks 3rd highest in England & Wales for the proportion with dependent children and 5th highest for those with non-dependent children (Enfield 2013).
Geographical targeting The provision should be open to Enfield residents from all parts of the borough.
Labour market Enfield’s Local Economic Assessment (LEA) draws attention to the increase of higher skilled jobs due to mechanisation and digital technology. The need to develop a local skilled workforce is more urgent than ever to encourage local businesses to offer employment to residents who have the necessary skills. Recent research indicates that of the many businesses located within the eastern part of the borough where high rates of unemployment and economic inactivity are most prevalent, much of the recruitment is through employment agencies whose clients live outside the borough.
Enfield’s Local Economic Assessment describes how Enfield’s local economy has experienced substantial changes over the past 40 years. From being dominated by large businesses and the manufacturing sector, it has changed to become a broader service-based economy made up predominantly of small and micro businesses. A key factor affecting the employability of unemployed residents is the level of their skills. Although the number of residents with no or low skills has reduced, Enfield still has a skills gap. With only about 1,000 jobs (10%) advertised with JCP each year requiring low or no skills and a relatively low density of jobs in the borough, it is clear that employers increasingly require higher levels of competence. The LEA has identified recruitment gaps and job opportunities in the following areas:
- Food and drink manufacturing and wholesale (linked to Stratford, SE growth plans)
- Logistics/distribution
- Construction
- Retail (600 in 2011)
- Health and social care (linked to re-structure)
It has been recognised that Enfield needs to respond to employer needs who have limited number of low skill jobs. Most jobs require skills/ job related training, so the borough needs to strengthen the training offer to respond to employers needs through its partnerships, specifically the Employment and Enterprise Board.
Enfield’s working age population is 204,500 (65.2% of the population). Its employment rate is 64%, which compares unfavourably with London, (68.6%) and nationally (70.3%) (Datashare London March 2013) There are discrepancies between the available vacancies and what JCP customers are seeking in terms of employment: the top occupations sought across all age groups are: Sales Assistants and Retail Cashiers; Administrative Occupations/ General Office Assistants. However, top vacancies available (from JCP’s Universal Jobmatch) are employment agencies, which are used for HGV/Driving Jobs and the second is Healthcare Services, which would include Care work.
**Sources of match funding** The match funding for this provision comes from Enfield Councils core funding. Project Specification 2: (Priority 1.1)
Project description and overview of requirements The focus of this funding opportunity should be on picking up individuals affected by the benefit cap for whom little of mainstream provision is appropriate; other specific target groups including women who have been out of the labour market for some time due to child and other care responsibilities; people over 45 with low or no skills and people with substance misuse problems.
Enfield Council works very closely with its partner agencies seeking to reduce worklessness, i.e. JobCentre Plus, and the Work Programme Prime Contractors to ensure consistency across the patch on a range of issues. These include data sharing, vacancy sharing and other collaborative initiatives to ensure that the primary outcome, securing sustained employment for local residents is achieved.
The project will seek to provide employment related support to individuals who have been claiming out of work benefits for some time and may include people referred to the government’s Work Programme Prime contractors who were not able to secure employment after this intervention and have returned to JCP.
It may also include carers who may have been out of the labour market from some time and are likely to need re-skilling as well as support with confidence and other “soft” skills. Most carers fall into the 45-64 age bracket and therefore employers are at risk of losing valuable and experienced staff; supporting employers to understand the needs of accommodating staff with care responsibilities is essential if these people are to make an effective contribution in the labour market, and may bring skills and experience gained through their care duties.
Recent research conducted by Enfield indicated that 43% of working carers feel their work had been negatively affected by caring and that they felt tired, stressed and anxious.
Provision The project will be expected to effectively target and engage with people furthest from the labour market offering personalised and tailored support to help them into employment and progress in work. A specific focus will be placed on the following target groups that have been identified as having the highest levels of labour market deprivation:
| Parents (including lone parents) | 25% of participants | |---------------------------------|---------------------| | Women | 51% of participants | | People with a health condition or disability | 22% of participants | | Ethnic minorities | 60% of participants |
In addition to these target groups, 25% of participants must be unemployed (i.e. claiming JSA) and 75% of participants must be economically inactive (i.e. ESA/IB, IS or non-benefit claimants). The programme will aim to complement existing provision so in all cases participants cannot be accessing existing Department for Work and Pensions (e.g. the Work Programme and ESF families with multiple problems programme) or Skills Funding Agency (e.g. pre-NEETs and NEETs programmes) mainstream provision.
Effective engagement of participants will be seen as a key element of this ESF project. As a result, delivery partners will be expected to offer support from a range of public and community venues across the borough including (but not limited to):
Customer service centres; Libraries; Community centres; Jobcentres; Schools and Children’s centres; health centres; Housing offices
Given the additional barriers this target group are likely to face, provision should be included to pay childcare/other care costs and travel to/from appointments.
In addition, delivery partners will need to set out how they plan to effectively engage with employers to source appropriate employment opportunities for participants.
The project will be expected to work closely with the existing employment initiatives in the borough and establish appropriate partnership protocols that will include engagement with participants and employers.
Bidders will also have to demonstrate experience and a proven track record of working in areas with high labour market deprivation such as Enfield.
This project will require a consortium of at least three delivery partners where no one partner accesses more than 50% of the total project value.
Enfield expects that this project will lead to the engagement of 126 very excluded residents and that 63 of these will be supported into some form of employment including self-employment on leaving the project. We expect to see proposals with proven and innovative approaches to delivering the project successfully with flexibility to meet the needs of the target group. However, bidders should consider including the following activities as part of their delivery models:
Basic skills; ESOL; Accredited vocational training; Non-accredited training; confidence building/mentoring; CV building and interview techniques; Work placements; Self employment support; Debt/financial management support (including Better Off Calculations)
**Suggested strategic partners**
Enfield Council particularly the Employment and Enterprise Board Jobcentre Plus (North and East London Districts) Work Programme Prime Contractors College of Haringey, Enfield and North East London Barnet and Southgate College NHS Enfield Barnet, Enfield and Haringey Mental Health Trust | Specification – Required outputs, results and unit costs | |----------------------------------------------------------| | **Number of projects to be funded and Borough** | 1 - London Borough of Enfield | | **Project Timescale** | **Delivery period** | **Start** | **End** | | | **Final Evaluation** | July 2013 | 30/06/2015 | | | | | 31/07/2015 | | **Outputs for payment** | **Number** | **Unit cost** | **Total** | **Must be achieved by** | | Number of participants receiving 6+ hours of support (IAG, job search, mentoring, training) | 133 | £313 | £41,629 | 31/12/2014 | | Number of participants achieving a full qualification at NVQ level 2 | 39 | £700 | £27,300 | 30/06/2015 | | Submission of final evaluation report | 1 | £1,161 | £1,161 | 31/07/2015 | | **Results for payment** | **Number** | **Unit cost** | **Total** | | Number of participants in employment within 13 weeks of leaving the project | 67 | £879 | £58,893 | 31/12/2014 | | Number of participants in sustained employment for 26 weeks (6M) | 43 | £1,419 | £61,017 | 30/06/2015 | | Maximum funding available | - | - | £190,000 | 12. **Hackney – Specification 3**
**Introduction to the borough**
Hackney is situated in the heart of London, and on the fringe of one of the world’s most important financial districts, the City of London.
The regeneration brought about by the 2012 Games, linking the tube to Hackney and the emergence of significant enterprise growth sectors focused on creative technology, retail and hospitality is transforming the local economy, bringing new jobs, housing and public facilities.
Against the backdrop of this economic growth Hackney’s employment rate has been steadily increasing since 2005 and is now nearing the London average (68.6%) at 65%. However, the unemployment rate has averaged around 11% since 2004, three percent higher than the London average.(^{10})
Significantly Hackney’s population on key out of work benefits averages 22% over the past decade, consistently 8% higher than the London average.(^{11})
Given the above, we are determined to harness the benefits of this economic regeneration to improve the life chances of local people, and ensure that all our residents can share in the borough’s steadily growing prosperity.
**Strategy**
Hackney’s Sustainable Community Strategy 2008-2018 promotes the key priority to –
- Reduce poverty by supporting residents into sustainable employment, and promoting employment opportunities
The review of the strategy conducted in 2012 makes the further recommendation to –
‘…identify and maximise employment opportunities arising from key growth areas in Hackney and neighbouring boroughs in East London and across the city for Hackney residents who are ready to work.’
This specification aims to maximise the benefits for Hackney residents of key growth sectors within the borough.
______________________________________________________________________
(^{10}) LBH, Local Economic Assessment 2011
(^{11}) LBH, Local Economic Assessment 2011 Population Hackney is a densely populated inner London borough with a large proportion of social housing.
- The 2011 Census estimates Hackney’s population to be 246,300.
- 28,040 residents were on key out of work benefits in February 2012. The borough estimates that this represents approximately 22% of the working age population.(^\\text{12})
- 45% of the total population on benefit, a steady 13,200, have been on Incapacity Benefit every year since 2005, nearly 3% higher than the London rate.(^\\text{13})
Geographical targeting Hackney is a place where pockets of deprivation and affluence exist in close proximity across all areas of the borough; hence, there is no specific geographic focus of the activity within the borough of Hackney. However, participants must be Hackney residents. Hackney is a borough where pockets of deprivation and affluence exist in close proximity across all areas of the borough.
Labour market The focus of activity is on the following three growth sectors within the borough –
1. High-end retail: To help Hackney residents take advantage of employment opportunities with the new high end retailers opening up in Hackney Central and other areas of the borough. This stream will recruit people interested in retail and provide them with IAG, assessment and CV support. The programme will assess their ability to go into high-end retail, provide training in employability and retailing to unlock that potential, and then secure them interviews with local retailers.
2. Creative tech. The creative tech sector is one of Hackney’s fastest growing areas, but is also one where longer established residents have struggled to enter. This stream will recruit people (primarily 18-24 year olds not supported through NEET provision) who are interested in getting into the creative tech sector, or who have shown some related aptitude (in music, art, writing, design, etc). It will work with the Government supported Tech City scheme to enable young people in Hackney to get into Tech City apprenticeships.
3. Hotel and hospitality. There are at least five new mid to high end hotels opening in Hackney in the next few years, substantially increasing the number of hospitality vacancies on offer. Hackney Council has Section 106 agreements in place with those hotels, calling for 30% local labour; however, the level of customer service required is much higher than with the traditional hospitality industry in Hackney (or even East London). By enabling Hackney residents to access employment this programme will ensure that 30% target was met. The provision will source and pre-screen candidates, providing IAG and CV support, customer service training, and then secure interviews with the hotels with which the Council has 106 agreements.
(^{12}) London Datastore 2013 and LBH, Local Economic Assessment 2011 (^{13}) LBH, Local Economic Assessment 2011 Hackney’s employment rate has increased significantly over the past 5 years. However, the number of longer term unemployed residents, particularly from harder to reach groups, remains high. Supporting younger people including NEETs, care leavers and lone parents into jobs and apprenticeships is a particular priority locally. The Council and other agencies invest significant resources in supporting these clients in the early stages of their journey into training and employment. This ESF programme will play a key role in enabling continuation and completion of this journey into sustained employment - thus realising the benefits of existing interventions. To be successful strong partnership working with existing teams and agencies working with these vulnerable groups will be essential.
**Sources of match funding** Match funding will be provided through section 106 funding agreements ring-fenced for employment initiatives. Project Specification 3: (Priority 1.1)
Project description and overview of requirements The project aims to ensure that Hackney residents are well placed to take advantage of the employment opportunities afforded by the growth of three key employment sectors in the borough. This is in line with the review of the Sustainable Community Strategy conducted in 2012 which makes the recommendation to, ‘…identify and maximise employment opportunities arising from key growth areas in Hackney and neighbouring boroughs in East London and across the city for Hackney residents who are ready to work.’
The work will involve a focus on both the client and employer side that ensures the needs of employers are well understood and that clients are given the appropriate level and type of support to meet these needs and secure employment.
The programme will aim to complement existing provision so in all cases participants cannot be accessing existing Department for Work and Pensions (e.g. the Work Programme and ESF families with multiple problems programme) or Skills Funding Agency (e.g. pre-NEETs and NEETs programmes) mainstream provision.
The provision will be required to –
- Develop and maintain working relationships with a number of key agencies who will provide a source of client referrals
- Develop and maintain working relationships with employers in the key growth sectors
- Work with clients to assess suitability, level and type of support required, and identify and engage the appropriate support provider or onward referral path.
- Ensure that clients are well matched to vacancies and fully prepared to take advantage of employment opportunities
- Develop and maintain working relationships with a range of training providers that support client preparations for employment in the key growth sectors
The provider will be expected to facilitate or deliver the following specific activities as part of the programme
- Engagement with community outreach networks as a source of client referrals
- Engagement with a range of Council teams to ensure strong handover of vulnerable clients
- Job focused Information Advice and Guidance (IAG)
- Identification of support and training needs
- Mentoring and training in sector-specific employment areas
- Employment-focused business engagement Suggested strategic partners The successful provider will be expected to work closely with the following organisations –
- Ways into Work team, Hackney Council (in all areas of the scheme)
- Job Centre Plus
- Neighbouring local authorities e.g. City of London
Employer Engagement –
- LBH Regeneration Delivery team and specifically town centre managers (who are engaging key employers)
- LBH planning team regarding key developments that have local labour clauses specified in section 106 agreements
- Local business groups (e.g. TechHub etc.)
- London Legacy Development Corporation (LLDC)
- iCity
- Any relevant government networks
Sourcing clients and referrals -
- London Borough of Hackney support services including Youth Services, Housing Benefits and Housing Needs
- Voluntary & Community Sector organisations and networks working with harder to reach groups and young people
- Registered Social Landlords
Accessing sector based training –
- Hackney Community College
- Hackney University Technical College (UTC)
- East London Advanced Technology Training (ELAAT)
- REDS10
- Any other relevant Hackney based training organisations including
- Relevant further and higher education institutions | Specification – Required outputs, results and unit costs | |----------------------------------------------------------| | **Number of projects to be funded and Borough** | 1 - London Borough of Hackney | | **Project Timescale** | **Delivery period** | **Start** | **End** | | | **Final Evaluation** | July 2013 | 30/06/2015 | | | | | 31/07/2015 | | **Outputs for payment** | **Number** | **Unit cost** | **Total** | **Must be achieved by** | | Number of participants receiving 6+ hours of support (IAG, job search, mentoring, training) | 136 | £313 | £42,568 | 31/12/2014 | | Number of participants achieving a full vocational qualification | 21 | £400 | £8,400 | 30/06/2015 | | Number of participants achieving a full qualification at NVQ level 2 | 71 | £700 | £49,700 | 30/06/2015 | | Participants undertaking a work placement | 26 | £300 | £7,800 | 31/12/2014 | | Submission of final evaluation report | 1 | £1,824 | £1,824 | 31/07/2015 | | **Results for payment** | **Number** | **Unit cost** | **Total** | | Number of participants in employment within 13 weeks of leaving the project | 68 | £879 | £59,772 | 31/12/2014 | | Number of participants in sustained employment for 26 weeks (6M) | 44 | £1,419 | £62,436 | 30/06/2015 | | Number of participants in further education and training | 10 | £500 | £5,000 | 30/06/2015 | | Maximum funding available | - | - | £237,500 |
13. **Havering – Specification 4**
**Introduction to the borough**
The London Borough of Havering is one of largest boroughs in Greater London with a population of around 234,000 and an area of approaching 43 square miles, half of which is green belt. It is situated in the North East of London, bordering Essex to the East and the North, the River Thames to the South and the London Boroughs of Redbridge and Barking & Dagenham to the West. As one of London’s safest and greenest boroughs, Havering already provides a fine quality of life for its residents.
**Strategy**
In 2008 the Council launched ‘Living Ambition’ - a long-term strategy to further improve the quality of life enjoyed by Havering’s residents.
The vision of Havering’s Living Ambition is:
‘**Havering’s residents enjoy the highest quality life in a borough that thrives on its links to the heart of the capital, without ever losing the natural environment, historical identity and local way of life that makes Havering unique**’
Underpinning Havering’s vision are five goals: Environment, Learning, Towns & Communities, Individuals and Value. To achieve these goals the council has identified a series of key activities that will be undertaken, along with performance measures that will assess how well the council is performing.
This project will help achieve the key activities in two of these goals as outlined in Havering’s Corporate Plan 2011 - 14:
**Learning:** to champion education and learning. Ensure that Havering’s young people get the best possible choice of career and study opportunities by maximising learning opportunities for residents.
**Towns and Communities:** To provide economic, social and cultural opportunities in thriving towns and villages. Strive to ensure that there are affordable homes for local people by ensuring fair and best use of council housing for those greatest in need.
The Living Ambition sets out Havering’s aspirations to dramatically increase the number of young people accessing work. To facilitate this, we will also need to increase basic and lower level skills training, target support for those young people on benefits and remove barriers to employment.
This project specification aims to explicitly link commitment and achievement by those supported through this provision to enhanced housing support by the borough. Population Analysis of local demographics reveals the following:
- 234,000 people live in Havering(^{14})
- Compared to the 2001 Census Havering had largest increase in unemployed age
- 16 - 24 (103% compared to London 44%) and Never Worked (274% compared to London 123%).(^{15})
- 10.8% of people live in social housing compared to other Outer London boroughs of 9.7%
Education and skills in Havering
- The latest Department for Education participation data (^{16}) shows that the participation of 16 and 17 year olds in education and training in Havering is above the national averages, and at the London averages. However, the same data shows that the participation of 16 year olds is significantly higher than for 17 year olds.
- The latest Not in Education, Employment and Training (NEET) data (^{17}) shows that over half of the NEET 16-18 year olds in Havering are aged 18.
- The level of residents in 2011 with no qualifications was 11.3% compared with 9.3% in London and 10.6% nationally.(^{18})
- Only 19% of residents had higher level qualifications compared with 45.9% in London and 32.9% nationally(^{19})
Geographical targeting The highest concentration of council owned housing stock is situated in the north of the borough at Harold Hill and is the most socio-economically deprived part of Havering (Gooshays includes three areas within the 20% most deprived in the country). We would expect the successful provider to draw the a significant proportion of the participants from these wards.
Harold Hill(^{20})
Gooshays and Heaton wards are the most deprived in Harold Hill
- Economically active % of population – 70.6% Gooshays, 71.4% Heaton, GB average 74%
- No qualification – 48.9% Gooshays, 52.7% Heaton, GB average 35.8%
- Higher level qualification – 6.7% Gooshays, 6.2% Heaton, GB average 20.4%
- JSA Claimants – 6.0% Gooshays, 6.5% Heaton, GB average 3.7%.
- The proportion of JSA claimants aged 18-24 were 26.4% Gooshays, 29% Heaton, GB average 26.6%
(^{14}) ONS Mid Year Estimates 2011 (^{15}) nomis (^{16}) http://www.education.gov.uk/childrenandyoungpeople/youngpeople/participation/a00214942/local-authority-education-training (^{17}) http://www.15billion.org/ims/monthlyreports/ (^{18}) nomis (^{19}) Ibid (^{20}) Ibid • Lone parents – 3.3% Gooshays, 3.2% Heaton, GB average – 1.5%
Labour market • 75.2% of Havering’s working age residents were classified as economically active in 2011/12, compared with 75.5% across London and 76.7% nationally. • Residents claiming JSA in December 2012 was 3.5% compared with 4.1% in London and 3.7% nationally. Of that o 7.2% of 16 – 24 in Havering were JSA claimants compared with 6.3% in London and 6.7% nationally • Lone parents making benefit claims in February 2012 was 1.7% compared with 1.8% in London and 1.5% nationally (Havering 2013)
Housing needs in Havering and the interaction with gaining / sustaining employment Havering is experiencing considerable housing pressures, with barriers to gaining housing particularly high among the target groups for this project. Of note:
• private sector rents, even at the entry level, for one and two bedroom accommodation represent a high proportion of starter incomes – for example, an entry level one bedroom private rent of £650 per calendar month represents around 52% of net income for someone earning £15,000 a year • accessing the private rented sector typically incurs high initial start-up costs – the average amount spent to secure a private tenancy in the borough is £2,000 once deposits and rent in advance have been taken into consideration • the demand for council and housing vacancies greatly outstrips supply - for example, each year around 250 one bed social rented homes become available, while there are some 5000 people on the current Housing Register needing this size of accommodation • from April 2013, the Council will refocus its efforts on housing those in most housing need. As a result, it is estimated that some 3,000 people aged under 34 will lose their eligibility for social housing in the borough because they are in fact adequately housed with parents / others. Private renting will remain an option, but housing benefit for single people under 35 years is now limited at the shared accommodation rate.
Lack of stable, suitable accommodation has been shown in various studies to negatively impact on employment outcomes. Therefore, a key and critical element of this project is incentivising participation by explicitly linking this to the Council’s ability to assist participants with their housing needs.
Sources of match funding This scheme will be matched with £125,000 from the London Borough of Havering from the Housing Revenue Account and Homeless Prevention Grant incomes. Project Specification 4: (Priority 1.1)
Project description and overview of requirements This project will take a holistic approach to supporting the short-term unemployed with bespoke training and support programmes designed to enhance their employment prospects and help them attain long-term employment. The project will consciously aim to complement existing schemes, but will have a far greater emphasis on personalised support and ‘hand-holding’. Our focus will be on raising the skills levels of the clients to ensure that their English, maths and ICT skills reach an attainment level that will help define their long-term life choices. The project aims to assist targeted participants into sustained employment, with a clear message that ‘work pays’ given by the provider and reinforced by the Council through housing support for all those taking part in the scheme, and enhanced housing options for those who secure and sustain employment.
Housing incentives The housing element will have a particularly strong incentivising effect, especially given the high housing demand in Havering from young persons discussed above. The London Borough of Havering is acutely aware of the importance of having a stable home life in order to find and sustain employment. This scheme looks to give participants the best chance possible to successfully secure work by offering a housing incentive.
It is envisaged that all participants will be offered preferential housing assistance through one of the programmes already on offer from the council to ensure that they are adequately housed whilst on the scheme. The assistance available includes:
- personalised housing advice while remaining living with parents
- a room in a Council managed House of Multiple Occupants
- an assured short-hold tenancy with floating tenancy sustainment support through the East London Single Persons Homelessness Project.
- self-contained accommodation offered through the Council’s Private Sector Lease scheme.
Once a participant has secured employment they will be able to have access to affordable housing that is suitable to their needs. After six months of sustained employment they will be given additional priority access to affordable housing should they need this extra help gaining settled accommodation.
A route into council or housing association is designed to be a strong incentive to participate in the scheme, gain employment and sustain it as council and housing association accommodation (a) typically offers longer tenancy terms than private rented housing, and (b) has lower rents than private rented alternatives enabling those taking up jobs with entry level wages to begin to move off of housing benefit with the consequent advantages this brings, such as escaping the ‘poverty trap’ more easily.
Housing incentives can be tailored to specific requirements and could include:
- access to the council and housing association accommodation once employment has been secured for those who would not usually qualify because they are adequately housed with parents/others • additional priority council and housing association accommodation after six months in employment if they haven’t secured a property prior to that.
It is anticipated that any offer of assistance into affordable accommodation will be welcomed by the participants and will promote the ‘work pays’ ethos of the programme.
**The project should:**
Deliver a holistic and comprehensive package supporting participants into work that will include:
• Regular and sustained 1-2-1 support, with a consistent advisor (where possible). • Link with other local provision, including ESF and Youth Contract provision in particular, to run employability training, and • Complement existing projects within the borough, with the organisation proactively working to set up partnerships with the suggested strategic partners.
The delivery organisation must show a clear understanding of the barriers faced by some clients and carry out detailed assessments of client need as soon as they are referred to the project. Our target group is 0-9 months unemployed and whilst some may be able to return to a working routine quickly, others may find this more difficult. It is imperative that the clients are supported back into work before entrenched worklessness takes hold and confidence levels dictate a low aspirational outlook. A key part of this project will be the opportunity for clients to access skills based training determined by individual need.
Subsequently, information, advice and guidance will be offered in a number of areas, to include:
• Initial work readiness assessment, including identifying any skills gaps • Signposting to existing training providers, notably those delivering Skills for Life • CV optimisation • Intensive job search • Job applications • Interview preparation • Brokerage of short term work placements • Support in accessing existing provision via the Jobcentre Plus Flexible Support Scheme (i.e. transport, clothing allowance), for work placements and/or prior to job interviews (where required) • Link to housing and welfare rights support • Budgeting and basic financial inclusion support (such as setting up and using a bank account) • Provide on-going in-work support to both participants and employers to facilitate a smooth transition into work and ensure that employment outcomes are sustained
A recent report into the business sectors in Havering(^{21}) have revealed the following as established/growth sectors within the local economy:
• Health & social care • Service sectors, including retail, leisure and hospitality
(^{21}) Havering Business Growth Report (September 2012) • Professional, business and financial services • Digital economy • Engineering, construction and manufacturing, including low carbon
The delivery organisation would be expected to support clients, including the accessing of training opportunities, to support these sectors.
Providers should demonstrate:
• Their proven and local track record of supporting people to access and progress into work/employability training in similar contexts to Havering • A convincing approach to establishing themselves in the borough from project start • How they will deliver the project from a base within the borough; • How they will work with employers to enable participants to access placement and job opportunities, and; • How they will link with welfare benefits advice services to ensure people take up the correct in and out of work benefits advice
**Project set up**
Referrals will be made primarily from those approaching the Council declaring some form of housing need, where they will be offered an initial housing solution.
- A board (made up of representatives from Havering’s Homes and Housing department and the organisation delivering the project) will then filter these referrals based on the eligibility priorities below.
- The proposed referral system is demonstrated in the flow diagram (below) showing the customer pathways and roles of the Council and Provider. The chosen provider will be expected to meet certain performance management criteria including:
- attending a regular referral panel with representatives from housing in order to assess the eligibility and suitability of proposed candidates
- providing monthly updates on the progress of referrals to the Council’s housing team to assist them in identifying the candidates in need of housing assistance. Referrals from Homes and Housing via LBH Housing Options
Referrals from strategic partners
Monthly panel (LBH Housing and provider)
Applicant eligible
Yes
Temporary housing solution required
Yes
PSL, HMO, ELHP single homeless project, private rent depending on suitability
No
Referral to other employment scheme or volunteering opportunity
No
Applicant gains employment
Yes
On programme – receives personalised training, work placement, IAG etc.
No
Provider supplies monthly updates on progress of referrals to identify participants who need housing incentive
Housing solution offered (including access to affordable housing where appropriate)
Applicant sustains employment
Yes
Priority access to affordable housing
Key to abbreviations LBH – London Borough of Havering PSL – Private Sector Lease HMO – House in Multiple Occupation ELHP – East London Housing Partnership IAG – Information, Advice & Guidance Proposed eligibility for programme
Required:
- Aged 18-34 (or aged 16-17 where the young people are not eligible for existing programmes, including ESF and Youth Contract provision)
- Workless individuals not on the Work Programme or other ESF funded provision
- Not in Education Employment or Training (including other work programmes)
- No or low skills level
- Presenting some housing need(s) for example households who are over-crowded, who are living with family but have been asked to leave or people facing barriers to the private rented sector.
- Lone parents
- Looked after Child, or Care Leaver
Suggested Strategic partners
- Housing Associations
- Homelessness & PSL related staff
- Jobcentre Plus
- Prospects (delivering local targeted IAG service for young people)
- Specialist local agencies supporting acute needs such as homelessness, debt, drug/alcohol misuse, mental health, etc.
- Local schools, colleges, Apprenticeship and employability providers, including;
- Havering Adult College
- Havering College of Further and Higher Education
- Havering Skills Academy
- Teaching & Learning Group
- HAVCO
- Lifeline
- YMCA
- TBG
- Chelmer Training
- Local Work Programme and ESF Programme providers
- Children Centres
- Youth Service
- Youth Offending Team
- Healthcare organisations
- Met Police & British Transport Police
- Drug Action Team
The delivery organisation will be expected to develop relationships with the relevant strategic partners and will be supported to do this by members of the project’s steering group. The organisation will also be expected, where relevant, to attend meetings with strategic partners and play an intrinsic role in the steering group of this project. Welfare reforms
The message of the project, that ‘work pays’, echoes that which underpins the motivations behind the upcoming multiple welfare reforms. These have a number of drivers and implications for the project:
- The single room rate will be paid for those aged 16-34, rather than currently only up to aged 24, so housing based incentives will be a strong motivation for this targeted age group.
- The benefit cap limits the amount of benefits a household can claim per week (£350 for single claimants, £500 for couples, with or without children, or single parents) In Havering, this could affect approximately 400 households
- The benefit cap will cease to apply when one member of the household is in work, so supporting people to do so is aligned with the national initiative
- There is also a link to Universal Credit, where all benefits payments are amalgamated into a single transaction, and the budgeting skills required will be facilitated through the IAG support offered by the delivery organisation. This will assist the subsequent seamless transition into work and a single, monthly salary payment.
There are a number of agencies that support residents with benefits advice and guidance including,
- Council tenants – welfare.reforms@havering.gov.uk or 01708 432537
- Private tenants, including Private Sector Leased, PSL, tenants - privatehousingsolutions@havering.gov.uk or 01708 431010
- Housing association tenants – contact your housing association directly
- The Public Advice and Service Centre (PASC) in The Liberty Shopping centre, Romford.
- Citizens Advice Bureau, 01708 763531 | Specification – Required outputs, results and unit costs | |----------------------------------------------------------| | **Number of projects to be funded and Borough** | 1 - London Borough of Havering | | **Project Timescale** | **Delivery period** | **Start** | **End** | | | **Final Evaluation** | July 2013 | 30/06/2015 | | | | | 31/07/2015 | | **Outputs for payment** | **Number** | **Unit cost** | **Total** | **Must be achieved by** | | Number of participants receiving 6+ hours of support (IAG, job search, mentoring, training) | 137 | £313 | £42,881 | 31/12/2014 | | Number of participants achieving a vocational qualification | 30 | £400 | £12,000 | 30/06/2015 | | Number of participants achieving a full qualification at NVQ level 2 | 30 | £700 | £21,000 | 30/06/2015 | | Participants undertaking a work placement | 50 | £300 | £15,000 | 31/12/2014 | | Submission of final evaluation report | 1 | £2,113 | £2,113 | 31/07/2015 | | **Results for payment** | **Number** | **Unit cost** | **Total** | | Number of participants in employment within 13 weeks of leaving the project | 69 | £879 | £60,651 | 31/12/2014 | | Number of participants in sustained employment for 26 weeks (6M) | 45 | £1,419 | £63,855 | 30/06/2015 | | Number of participants in further education and training | 40 | £500 | £20,000 | 30/06/2015 | | Maximum funding available | - | - | £237,500 |
14. Islington – Specification 5
Strategy Despite its wealthy image, Islington is the fourteenth most deprived local authority area in England, with extremes of rich and poor. The Islington Fairness Commission (IFC) was set up in June 2010 to look into how to make the borough a fairer place. A year later it published its final report ‘Closing the Gap’ which sets the framework for the Councils Corporate Plan and strategy on employment.
The 2012/13 Corporate Plan includes Breaking the Cycle of Poverty as one of the Council’s six priorities towards a ‘fairer Islington’. Key to breaking this cycle is to tackle the high levels of inter-generational worklessness and dependence on benefits. The Council has set challenging targets around reducing the overall rate of unemployment which has been signed up to by key partners including Job Centre Plus. Within this the council is committed to helping develop opportunities for residents to become self-employed.
This project is part of LBI’s response to changes in the benefit system; specifically the cap on total out of work benefits to £500 per week for families irrespective of the number of children and disregarding the higher cost of housing in London, that will not apply if they are receiving working family tax credits. Employment is the route out of poverty for these families. However, many of them, with children under 5 years old will not be on JSA. Therefore contact with job centres will be more limited, yet the effect of the benefit cap means that staying on out of work benefits will be unaffordable.
Population
- There are just over 24,000 unemployed people in Islington which at 16.4% of the working age population is significantly above the London and national average. 13,610 children under 15 are living in poverty, the majority in lone parent households.
- There are 7,500 parents in Islington claiming out of work benefits of which an estimated 950 will find their rent unaffordable due to the Housing Benefit cap. This represents 61% of households with 4 or more children and 10% of households with up to 3 children.
- Child poverty in Islington is the second highest in the country (Islington 2013)
Geographical targeting The service will be available to all Islington parents affected by the benefits cap. Activities should be provided close to where most parents’ worst affected live and/or congregate. Co-location and sharing of resources with adult learning centres and children’s centres in the borough is being explored. In addition, through Islington’s Parental Employment Partnership and our close working relationships with Job Centre Plus offices, we will be able to take direct referrals from Job Centre Plus offices and from our own learning centres which are based in the North, South and Centre of the borough. Our learning centres work with in excess of 1,200 parents per year and have a direct route into parents affected by the welfare benefit changes. Labour market
- An estimated 950 households will be significantly affected by welfare reforms and will be unable to pay their rent due to the housing benefit cap.
- Barriers to employment for workless families include lack of flexible job opportunities, high costs and inflexibility of childcare, impacts of long-term worklessness.
- The majority of self-employed are likely to be doing so in professions such as cleaning, small scale catering, child minding, children’s parties, window cleaning, driving, administrative home working, personal care etc.
- LBI Labour market analysis based on advertised vacancies between June 2011 to May 2012 showed:
- 83% were for full time positions, effectively excluding those without childcare
- Significant % were for positions that are often provided on a self-employed basis:
- 16% were for manual/trades work
- 12% for messengers, couriers, security and cleaners
- Over half of vacancies for child-minders advertised in central London were in Islington
- There were 128 advertisements for beauticians and hairdressers
- There were 66 advertisements for taxi or mini cab drivers
Sources of match funding
- £25,000 from S106 fund,
- £25,000 from core revenue, Project Specification 5: (Priority 1.1) Self-employment
Project description and overview of requirements The Project will provide a comprehensive support service for parents most affected by the benefit cap to start and sustain self-employment. The service will respond to the needs of the economically inactive or unemployed parents with 3 or more children for whom frequent use of childcare is unaffordable. Typically these will be long term unemployed parents with a lack of work experience, low level skills, childcare responsibilities, lone parents and who may be experiencing barriers such as anxiety and depression, often associated with living in poverty.
The Project will be working with parents who may be vulnerable, have high level needs and who will not be confident or familiar with the idea of setting up a business. It is therefore important that the project provides a service tailored to the needs of this client group and a holistic approach to clients offering an intensive wrap around service.
The Project will need to ensure that the basic of business planning, cashflow and tax returns are understood, but does not need to aim to develop high profile marketing expertise or well developed entrepreneurial skills. The service will need to provide advice, encouragement, guidance and morale support to get started and more importantly sustain the clients in working for themselves.
The Project will be expected to link with the Council’s strategy and with other activities being delivered locally, such as JCP courses run through A4E (which are generally for those affected by the benefit cap, but not specifically about self-employment), business start-up support such as the New Enterprise Allowance, and enterprise clubs. These services are valuable but are not impacting on our target group because the activities are not specifically tailored to smaller scale working for themselves and the sustainability support is limited. This Project’s clients should not be on the Work Programme which is for those who are unemployed for more than a year, while this target client group are more likely to be economically inactive with one or more children under the age of 5 years.
This Project should dovetail with these statutory services and strengthen the support available to clients. This client group will require more intensive and sensitive support, and the project will need to integrate fully with statutory and voluntary services.
Provision The project will work with parents referred to it by Islington Working for Parents who will have conducted an initial assessment and identified an interest in self-employment. It is possible that some of the parents may also have attended a more general self-employment course. Further referrals will come through JCP and other agencies in Islington. Some additional outreach maybe required from the project provider and this should take place at appropriate locations to the client group, such as Islington’s Children’s Centres and Islington’s Learning Centres for adults as well as local schools and community groups, outside schools or at children’s playgrounds or through relevant community based organisations. The council is keen to offer colocation space to the project in suitable community based venues.
The Project should:
- Be tailored to meet the needs of Islington residents, showing a good understanding of Islington. • Deliver the service in Islington and target location of activities to meet the needs of the client group, locations will be agreed in consultation with Islington Council.
• Receive referrals from Islington Working for Parents and other agencies in the borough and possibly undertake outreach at appropriate locations.
• Support consideration by parents of the feasible self-employment options for each individual by going through personal skills and what would be needed to earn an income from them, to enable a realistic and informed decision about working for themselves and develop a personal action plan.
• Provide relevant and accessible information and advice, along with guidance and business knowledge on becoming self-employed tailored to the client group. This should include: o How to register as self-employed and comply with HMRC requirements and other regulations around trading law, licensing, health and safety etc. o Defining and validating a business idea and planning to succeed. o Finding customers, helping to identify their own networks and contacts and thinking how to build on these. o Managing money, cash flow, maintaining accounts, universal credit requirements and financing the business appropriately.
• Offer expert and sensitive guidance on the challenges and pitfalls of working for yourself.
• Ensure the clients are in receipt of expert advice on claiming suitable in-work benefits and/or combining self-employment with part-time work.
• Ensure the service is integrated with current provision across the Council and other providers in the borough such as JCP and the council’s Income Maximisation Team (IMAX) to include alignment of provision, referrals and returns to relevant agencies and proactive communication.
• Ensure that the service has a strong understanding and connection to other relevant local provision and refers to Islington’s Learning Centres for skills in English, maths, ICT.
• Continue to provide advice and guidance and a programme of supportive ‘handholding’ in an effective form, or range of forms, for at least six months to ensure sustained self-employment. Within this, the service should imaginatively address particular needs and challenges likely to impact on this group around marketing, network building, self-confidence and maintaining motivation, as well as considering how to address practical barriers such as lack of access to IT, regular childcare or funds to cover registration fees or certificates.
Prospective providers should detail how they will address these challenges and the form or forms in which they will deliver different elements of support. Consideration could be given to some of the following types of activities if prospective providers think appropriate: • Ongoing support and advice generally offered proactively and/or on demand • Signposting to other support offers i.e. Institute of Chartered accountants • Website, or other marketing support • Self-employed mentors • Peer support group • Refresher training 6 months later • Information and reference pack • Brokering self-employment opportunities • Bursary fund to pay some costs, i.e. taxi license – PVDL, or registration fees on websites, tools • Start a campaign to encourage people to use those who are ‘legit’ • Mechanism to enable joint promotion or work space • Running ‘Meet your buyer’ events bringing residents in contact with businesses • Monitoring and regular check-in calls
Suggested strategic partners The provider will be expected to work with: • London Borough of Islington o Islington Working for Parents to receive and make referrals to, to gain information from initial assessments, and general support to the families, particularly those that do not go on to start or sustain self-employment. o Parent Champions who work out of all 3 Islington Learning for Working Learning Centres and who provide outreach and pre-employment support services and will be a key referral route for this project. o Islington Learning for Working learning centres Business Employment Support Team who will be able to help create and identify market opportunities for self-employment using business intelligence and links with employers who take on self-employed people o Income Maximisation Team for better off calculations and assistance with benefit claims o Communications to promote project, publicise success stories etc. o Family Information Service for help with childcare for clients o Single Employer Face Networking Forum, to attend quarterly meeting and keep others in the borough informed and maximise collaboration. • Job Centre Plus to receive referrals from them and also to refer clients on to NEA if appropriate. • Parental Employment Partnership led Working Together Forum where all providers in the borough including ILW; JCP; Families First etc. come together to share good practice and join up working at a grass roots level. • Other business advice organisations in the borough | Specification – Required outputs, results and unit costs | |----------------------------------------------------------| | **Number of projects to be funded and Borough** | 1 - London Borough of Islington | | **Project Timescale** | **Delivery period** | **Start** | **End** | | | **Final Evaluation** | July 2013 | 31/07/2014 | | | | | 31/08/2014 | | **Outputs for payment** | **Number** | **Unit cost** | **Total** | **Must be achieved by** | | Number of participants receiving 6+ hours of support (IAG, job search, mentoring, training) | 70 | £313 | £21,910 | 31/01/2014 | | Submission of final evaluation report | 1 | £1,590 | £1,590 | 31/08/2014 | | **Results for payment** | **Number** | **Unit cost** | **Total** | | Number of participants in self-employment within 13 weeks of leaving the project | 35 | £900 | £31,500 | 31/01/2014 | | Number of participants in sustained self-employment for 26 weeks (6M) | 20 | £2,000 | £40,000 | 31/07/2014 | | Maximum funding available | - | - | £95,000 | 15. Redbridge – Specification 6
Introduction to the borough Redbridge is an outer north east London borough with a fast growing, diverse population. Redbridge is situated in the north-east of the capital, bordering Waltham Forest, Havering, Newham, Barking and Dagenham and Essex. The Borough stretches from Ilford and Seven Kings in the south, through Newbury Park and Barkingside, to Woodford Green, Woodford Bridge and Hainault in the north.
Redbridge forms part of the North East London Sub-Region as defined in the London Plan, which includes the boroughs of Waltham Forest, Havering, Barking and Dagenham, Newham, Tower Hamlets and the City of London. It is also part of the North London Strategic Alliance, and the London Cambridge Stansted Consortium, linking it to Enfield, Hackney, Haringey, Islington as well as the District councils of Broxbourne, East Herts, Epping Forest, Harlow and Uttlesford.
Redbridge has excellent transport connectivity, it has one of the best living environments in London with one third of the borough comprised of green open spaces, and schools that consistently achieve national academic excellence. However it has also experienced increasing levels of deprivation and faces increasing challenges as demographic changes bring a fast growing and very diverse population. Redbridge is the fourth most diverse borough in the country and approximately 66 per cent of its population hail from a minority ethnic background. Redbridge has vibrant multi-cultural community with a population of 281,400 residents.
As well as its Outer London borough characteristics, it also has high levels of deprivation in some wards, particularly located in south of the borough, associated with the characteristics of Inner London boroughs. Redbridge’s rank of average deprivation score has improved slightly from the 133rd most deprived in England in 2007, to 134th in 2010. The main areas ranking high on the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) remain in the south of the Borough and the least deprived areas in the north west of the Borough. Seven of 21 wards contain Lower layer Super Output Areas (LSOAs) in the 20% most deprived in England.
When deprivation is considered at ward level, Clementswood remains the most deprived ward in Redbridge. Clementswood, Loxford and Hainault have a relatively high concentration of deprivation in the borough. All of the LSOAs in Clementswood and Loxford are ranked within the 40% most deprived areas in England. Four LSOAs remain in the highest 20% deprived from 2004, to 2010, an LSOA at the most southern end of Loxford ward, the Orchard Estate in Roding and two areas in Valentines ward just north of Ilford High Road. There are now more LSOAs ranking in the highest 20% deprived areas on the Rank of Education and Skills, Crime, Living Environment (Redbridge 2013).
Strategy
Redbridge Employment, Skills and Enterprise Plan 2011 http://www2.redbridge.gov.uk/cms/planning_and_the_environment/planning/inward_investment_enterprise.aspx
Redbridge Corporate Strategy 2012-14 Population
Total population - Redbridge is estimated to have a population of 281,400 as at 30th June 2011, a 2,400 increase since Census day on 27th March 2011, and an increase of over 37,000 since 2001. This represents a 15.3% increase, or an annualised increase of 1.43%. If this were to continue, the population would grow by 76,000 to reach 355,000 by 2028.
Census 2011 data shows Redbridge has the second highest total change in London only exceeded by Newham. Tower Hamlets had the third highest change in London.
Redbridge and Newham had the highest figures for net migration. Detailed components of change for migration are not currently available however this could suggest a possible impact from the Olympics construction and regeneration works.
Children - Redbridge is estimated to have 63,400 persons aged between 0 and 15 (23% of the total population)
Working age - Redbridge is estimated to have 184,400 persons aged between 16 and 64 years of age (65% of the total population)
Retirement age - Redbridge is estimated to have 33,600 persons aged 65 and upwards (12% of the total population)
Diversity – Redbridge has the fourth most diverse community in England and Wales. Since 2001, the proportion of White British residents declined by 23 percentage points, while the proportion of Asian/Asian British residents grew by 16 percentage points. 62% of Redbridge residents were born in England, a 12 percentage point decrease since 2001, but in line with the London average. India was the most common birthplace outside the UK for Redbridge residents.
37% of the Redbridge population was Christian, the fourth lowest proportion in England and Wales. Muslim (23%) and Hindu (11%) were the next largest religions in Redbridge, the sixth and fourth highest proportions in England and Wales respectively.
Redbridge had a lower proportion of one-person households and greater proportion of couples with dependent children than the London average.
A higher proportion of Redbridge residents were in very good health than for the country as a whole, although the figure was lower than the London average.
Redbridge residents were more likely to provide unpaid care to family, friends and neighbours (10%) than London as a whole (8%) (Redbridge 2013).
**Geographical targeting**
When deprivation is considered at ward level, Clementswood remains the most deprived ward in Redbridge. Clementswood, Loxford and Hainault have the highest concentrations of deprivation in the borough. All of the LSOAs in Clementswood and Loxford are ranked within the 40% most deprived areas in England. Four LSOAs remain in the highest 20% deprived from 2004 to 2010, an LSOA at the most southern end of Loxford ward, the Orchard Estate in Roding and two areas in Valentines ward just north of Ilford High Road.
The main areas ranking high on the Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD) reflect the highest levels of ‘out of work benefit’ claimants and are predominantly in the south of the Borough. The least deprived areas are in the north west of the Borough, however Hainault in the North East of the borough has a high concentration of deprivation and relatively high ‘out of work benefit’ claimant levels.
The ESF project will be expected to specifically target the following wards:
**Loxford, Clementswood, Valentines, Goodmayes, Seven Kings, Newbury, Roding and Hainault.**
It is expected that at least 50% of participants will come from these wards. These wards are predominantly in the south of the borough, however residents of Hainault in the north east and Roding (Orchard Estate) in the north west experience greater barriers in accessing employment support and provision which is mainly focussed in the south of the borough, and often have to travel to access this support. It is expected that the ESF provider will support residents of these areas by engaging directly in these areas and locating some provision in these wards, as well as assisting residents in overcoming travel barriers. Labour market Over the last four years Redbridge has seen an unprecedented rise in Job Seeker Allowance (JSA) claimants, rising from 3,735 in January 2008 to a peak of 7,408 in February 2010. The claimant rate remained around this level to February 2012 when it stood at 7,242. There has been a gradual but consistent decline in numbers since then with a rate of 6,582 recorded in December 2012. Jobcentre Plus and the Work Redbridge partnership have an aspirational target to reduce this to 6,000 by end 2013/14.
Overall working age benefit claimants have remained around 23,500 over the last four years and totalled 23,270 in March 2012 (Redbridge 2013). There are high concentrations of Incapacity Benefit and Employment Support Allowance claimants in Hainault, Loxford and Valentines wards, as well as higher than average Income Support and JSA claimants.
As part of the overall JSA rate, Redbridge has experienced a rise in youth unemployment in recent years as a result of the recession and local and national economic situation. JSA claimant rate for 18–24 year olds rose from 910 in January 2008 to a peak of 2,150 in September 2011. This figure has been gradually declining with some seasonal blips since then and currently stands at around 1,500. Of these, 160 have been unemployed for 6–12 months, and 185 for over 12 months. However, the borough and its partners are aware that the JSA figures do not give a true picture of youth unemployment and NEET levels, as not all young people claim JSA.
Data for October 2012 show the percentage of NEET 16–18 year olds in the borough was 3.6%. Although the NEET cohort in Redbridge is relatively small, the young people have a range of complex issues which are major barriers to engagement. Those most vulnerable with additional needs, including LDD are overrepresented in the NEET group.
Worklessness remains a key issue for the borough, in 2011/12 65.5% of the population aged 16 – 64 was in employment lower than the London average of 68.10% and the National average of 70.30%.
The UK economy’s overall competitiveness has suffered in recent years, and Redbridge has not escaped the impacts of the recession and national and global economic downturn.
Despite the economic weight of central London, the 19 boroughs making up outer London still account for 42% of the city’s jobs and 36% of its economic output, but jobs growth has been far slower and large numbers of workers commute to jobs in central London. Part of the reason for this is that outer London was disproportionately hit by the steep fall in manufacturing employment, but has been a less attractive focus for investment in financial and professional services.
Large numbers of Redbridge residents are employed within the financial services industry, often commuting into central London. The Redbridge economy benefits from this as residents commute into better paying jobs in Central London.
Redbridge’s economy is of a similar scale to its near neighbours and in common with other outer London boroughs, has relatively low productivity. The boroughs main town centre, Ilford, is one of a number of competing retail hubs in East London which include other recognised town centres such as Romford, Lakeside, Bluewater and Stratford Westfield.
Redbridge has experienced falling job density in the last 10 years. This is despite an increase in absolute numbers of jobs (due to increased population). Although almost 40% of Redbridge residents work within the borough, Redbridge is an important supply of labour to central London, highest work destinations outside of the borough are City of London, Westminster and Tower Hamlets.
58% of jobs added in Redbridge between 1999-2007 were accounted for by health and education sectors – notably 82% of all jobs growth in Redbridge has been in sectors largely driven by residential demand.
Employment by ward - the largest labour market is Clementswood ward, which is dominated by public sector employment. This is followed by Valentines, Seven Kings and Newbury. Due to the fact that significant numbers of the Redbridge workforce are employed in public administration, education and health industries, the public sector cuts are likely to have a notable impact across the borough, but particularly in the wards of Clementswood, Seven Kings and Newbury, where the largest numbers are employed within the public sector.
Full-time employment in Redbridge reduced by nearly five percentage points since 2001 whilst part time employment and self-employment showed moderate increases.
Between 2001–2011 professional occupations increased by nearly nine percentage points amongst Redbridge residents. Managers, directors and senior officials and administrative and secretarial occupations both decreased by five percentage points.
Redbridge has high rates of both business formation and failure – ‘churn’. 2009 data on VAT registered businesses show new business start-ups amounted to 13.7% of the total stock, while on average 12.3% of the total business stock failed.
Redbridge is a borough of small businesses. 89.6% of the borough’s c.8,500 businesses have between 1–10 employees. Large businesses, though few in number and predominantly public sector, still account for the largest share of total employment.
The main employment sectors in the borough include:
- Public sector, health and education
- Major Retail, Ilford and the commercial centres of Gants Hill, South Woodford, Wanstead, Barkingside
- Industrial, Hainault Business Park
- Financial and Professional Services
- Evening and night time offer in Ilford, Gants Hill, South Woodford and Wanstead
Key businesses include:
- Bombardier Transportation, Ilford
- Barnardo’s Head Office, Barkingside
- The Exchange Mall, Ilford (owned by Meyer Bergman)
- Archant Media – London Office based in Ilford
Redbridge has two Business Improvement District companies:
- Ilford BID Ltd
- Hainault BID Ltd Ilford is one of the Mayor’s 12 Metropolitan Town Centres/Opportunity Area (London Plan).
The highest number of vacancies notified to JCP are consistently in the Care Sector, followed by Sales Representatives, Labourers, Cleaners and Hospitality staff. There continues to be a weak correlation between the job vacancies available and those sought by JSA customers, and better matching of skills and employment preparation and opportunities available is a high priority for JCP, Work Redbridge and its partners.
**Skills Base:**
Redbridge has high performing schools, most secondary schools have their own Sixth Forms and are academically high achieving.
**NEET**
Redbridge has a relatively low number of young people (16-18) not in Employment, Education or Training. Data for October 2012 show the number of NEET 16-18 year olds in the borough was 3.6%.
**Higher Education**
Redbridge has the highest number of school leavers going onto university in the country. 72% in 2010, although this may have since reduced in the light of introduction of tuition fees.
**Adult skills**
The Redbridge population has higher NVQ4 skill levels than England as a whole, but lower than those in the London average. Redbridge also has a particularly high percentage of people with no qualifications at all.
Anecdotal local evidence suggests that there are high levels of inward migration of people with low skill levels.
**Sources of match funding**
London Borough of Redbridge will match fund £100,000 from S106 funds. Project Specification 6: (Priority 1.1)
Project description and overview of requirements The project will build on the successes of the Work Redbridge project and partnership, providing a personalised employment support package to those people furthest from the labour market (but not participating in Work Programme provision). The project will be expected to effectively target and engage people from the following target groups:
Parents (including lone parents) - 25% of participants Women - 51% of participants Young People 18-24 not engaged with NEET provision - 20% of participants People 50+ - 20% of participants Ethnic Minorities - 60% of participants People with a health condition or disability - 22% of participants
65% of participants must be economically inactive (ie. Claiming IS or ESA/IB or non-benefit claimants. 35% of participants must be unemployed (ie. Claiming JSA)
Tackling worklessness requires the effective co-ordination and integration of a wide range of services. In Redbridge this is co-ordinated by Work Redbridge, a Council led partnership of 20+ employment and training providers. Work Redbridge has developed a brand which has become known across the borough as an access point to employment and skills provision. Work Redbridge works in close partnership with Jobcentre Plus and is developing a joint SLA with agreed targets.
Work Redbridge provides a virtual information hub on its web pages www.redbridge.gov.uk/workredbridge; delivers weekly outreach information and signposting sessions at different locations across the borough; delivers a weekly work club, IT for Work clubs, and ESOL conversation clubs, as well as co-ordinating a range of other support and events including Jobs, Training and Opportunities Fairs. Work Redbridge aims to ensure that support services are co-ordinated and linked to facilitate effective pathways to employment for people whose needs require that they access a range of different support.
The ESF project provider will be expected to be an integral part of the Work Redbridge partnership and deliver employment support to participants as part of the overall Work Redbridge programme. This will include:-
- Attendance at regular partnership meetings
- Adherence to Work Redbridge code of practice
- Participation in Work Redbridge Outreach and Events
- Close liaison with Work Redbridge advisers on referrals and type of support provided
- Monitoring and reporting on regular basis to ensure services are integrated into overall borough provision.
Effective and sustained engagement of participants will be a key element of this project. The provider will be expected to offer support from a range of community venues including:-
- Libraries • Children’s Centres • Housing offices • Community Centres • Jobcentre • Schools
The provider will be expected to deliver engagement and support services accessible to residents in all the target deprived wards including Hainault in the North East of the Borough and Roding in the North West.
The provider must demonstrate a proven track record of successful working in areas of high labour market deprivation.
**Provision** The provider is expected to deliver a range of engagement, motivation, training and support to meet the employability needs of the most disadvantaged groups in the borough and to achieve the output and outcome targets set out in this specification. The provider will be expected to provide a flexible and tailored package of support to meet the needs of individual participants, and to complement and add value to the existing landscape of support and services provided through the Work Redbridge partnership.
There is a particular need in the borough for:
• ESOL and basic skills training • Employability skills • ICT skills to enable people to apply for and compete for jobs in an increasingly digitised job-search market • Debt advice and financial management skills • Support and information on benefits including Better Off Calculations • Work experience • Mentoring and in work support
There is also a need for support for people with existing skills and experience who have been made redundant and require help in finding employment at a similar level.
The provider will be expected to provide access to all the above provision and tailor to the individual’s needs.
**Suggested strategic partners** • Redbridge Council • Work Redbridge • Work Redbridge Partnership including:- o Jobcentre Plus o Redbridge College o Redbridge Institute • NHS North East London and the City • Redbridge CVS | Specification – Required outputs, results and unit costs | |----------------------------------------------------------| | **Number of projects to be funded and Borough** | 1 - London Borough of Redbridge | | **Project Timescale** | **Delivery period** | **Start** | **End** | | | **Final Evaluation** | July 2013 | 30/06/2015 | | | | | 31/07/2015 | | **Outputs for payment** | **Number** | **Unit cost** | **Total** | **Must be achieved by** | | Number of participants receiving 6+ hours of support (IAG, job search, mentoring, training) | 142 | £313 | £44,446 | 31/12/2014 | | Participants undertaking a work placement | 50 | £300 | £15,000 | 31/12/2014 | | Submission of final evaluation report | 1 | £1,385 | £1,385 | 31/07/2015 | | **Results for payment** | **Number** | **Unit cost** | **Total** | | Number of participants in employment within 13 weeks of leaving the project | 71 | £879 | £62,409 | 31/12/2014 | | Number of participants in sustained employment for 26 weeks (6M) | 40 | £1,419 | £56,760 | 30/06/2015 | | Number of participants in further education and training | 20 | £500 | £10,000 | 30/06/2015 | | Maximum funding available | - | - | £190,000 | 16. Sutton – Specification 7
Strategy In June 2012, at the ‘Opportunity Sutton Inward Investment’ event, Sutton took a new approach to economic development and publicly demonstrated its commitment to economic growth and prosperity. The event launched ‘Opportunity Sutton: A Statement for Growth’ to business partners and potential investors. From this, four strategic themes were drawn, namely:
- To create a distinctive and competitive offer.
- To create an enterprising borough
- To ensure sustainable growth – the green economy
- To ensure residents share in the growth by matching skills with demand
A programme of work has been developed to deliver seven priority projects which will provide the tangible economic growth needed to realise these aims. One of the seven projects, ‘Matching Skills with Demand’, proposes a ‘Skills Demand Plan and Job Brokerage system’, which will entail partnership working with larger local businesses to ascertain the skills and qualifications they require from their employees.
This project is part of the strategy and will develop partnerships between the Council and local businesses which will bridge the gap between employer demand and LBS residents’ skills thereby matching local businesses and local residents. As part of this project, partnerships between the Opportunity Sutton team and businesses will be developed and grown which will facilitate job brokerage, work placements and apprenticeships for the borough’s residents.
Whilst the business engagement and job brokerage project will be ‘generic’, ESF funding will be used for a matched funded project to specifically target lone parents (specifically young female lone parents) and remove the barriers to employment that they face. Furthermore, changes to the welfare system and the introduction of the benefit cap are likely to disproportionately affect the financial situation of a number of lone parents in the borough. Population
- 191,100 people live in Sutton, the population is projected to rise to 222,000 by 2021
- 21% of the population are from BAME communities (compared to 13% in 2001) and 8% of the population are from non-British white communities (notably South African, Polish and Irish)
- 25,400 are in the 16-24 age range.
Lone Parents
- Sutton had 1,860 lone parents claiming Housing Benefits (classified as lone parent) in February 2012
- On 30 January 2013 this figure had grown to 1,949 which is a 4.8% increase in a year
Geographical targeting The successful provider should solely concentrate recruitment of participants in St Helier, Wandle Valley and Beddington South wards. These three wards have high levels of lone parents claiming benefits in the borough. In January 2013 the numbers of residents on lone parent benefits were:
- 253 in St Helier Ward
- 272 in Wandle Valley
- 219 in Beddington South
The three wards above account for 38.2% of all lone parents in the borough on 30 January 2013. This represents an increase from 35% in February 2012. There are 18 wards in the borough
Deprivation Index
- Overall, small areas within Sutton are becoming relatively more deprived in comparison with the rest of England.
- There are 6 Lower Super Output Areas (LSOA) within Sutton that rank in the 20% most deprived in England.
- 2 Lower Super Output Area (LSOA) in the St Helier ward moved into a more deprived quintile from 2007 to 2010.
- St Helier is the most deprived ward in the borough when considering an average of SOA scores (27.53).
- 3 Lower Super Output Area (LSOA) in the Wandle Valley ward moved into a more deprived quintile from 2007 to 2010.
- Wandle valley is the second most deprived ward in the borough when considering an average of SOA scores (26.75)
______________________________________________________________________
22 Nomis and LBS Revenues and Benefits 23 Nomis 24 http://www.mertonjsna.org.uk/uploadDocument/PdfDocument/indices%20of%20deprivation%202010%20in%20sutton%20and%20merton%20final.pdf • Beddington South is the third most deprived ward in the borough when considering an average of SOA scores (22.85). • 1 Lower Super Output Area (LSOA) in the Beddington South ward moved into a more deprived quintile from 2007 to 2010.
Labour market Sutton had an average of 108,400 economically active residents between January 2012 and December 2012, which represented an economic activity rate of 80.7% which is higher than London and Great Britain (68.6% and 70.4% respectively). However, levels of worklessness are high among lone parents.
The largest employment sectors for Sutton residents are:
• Public administration, education and health (37.3%) • Banking, finance and insurance (21.7%), and • Distribution, hotels and restaurants (16.1%)(^{25})
Sources of match funding The London Borough of Sutton is providing £50,000 of match for this project from core funds. In addition, the borough will provide in-kind support to facilitate job-brokerage and the sourcing of work experience and job-placements.
(^{25}) LSEO indicators for Sutton February 2013. Project Specification 7: (Priority 1.1)
Project description and overview of requirements The successful provider should solely concentrate recruitment of participants in St Helier, Wandle Valley and Beddington South wards.
The target group for this specification is workless lone parents. Bidders should therefore demonstrate in particular how they will address three barriers to employment for lone parents:
1. Lack of confidence and skills in returning to the job market
2. Fear of losing regular benefits and therefore not having a set income to pay bills etc.
3. Childcare (time, finance, and travel) whilst attending training or volunteering
Bidders will be expected to employ at least one advisor who would work at least one day a week from each of the following locations:
- Amy Johnson Centre in the heart of the Beddington South ward (and Roundshaw estate)
- Tweeddale Children’s Centre (in St Helier ward but on the boundary with the Wandle Valley ward).
58 participants should receive a minimum of 6 hours 1-to-1 support per person. The support should include:
- high quality CV writing,
- assistance with writing application forms
- interview techniques, and
- job search and job search strategies
Advisors will be expected to make the lone parents aware of any “in work benefits” and would ensure they are receiving all of their “out of work” benefits. This includes the entitlement to free care for 3 and 4 year olds and free care for 2 year olds (if disadvantaged). A £4,000 childcare fund has been allocated to provide up to one day of childcare if necessary.
The successful provider will be expected to work in partnership with the borough to deliver part of the Opportunity Sutton programme. Sutton Council will ascertain the skills and qualifications required by local businesses. The successful provider will be expected to ensure that its training offer and progression routes for participants are in line with these requirements.
LB Sutton will assist with brokering employment and work experience opportunities for lone parents with local businesses. The successful bidder will be expected to provide candidates ready to fill these opportunities.
The successful bidder will be expected to provide (or commission) formal qualifications across a range of sectors including childcare, teaching assistants, admin, health and social care or similar to at least an NVQ level 2. The successful bidder will be expected to make effective links to local college provision, in particular Carshalton College (Carshalton College has crèche facilities which can be used while qualifications are gained).
These should be directly linked to employers and job opportunities (i.e. teacher’s assistants linked to local schools for further training and job opportunities and customer services courses linked to local businesses). The London Borough of Sutton would assist with engaging with local businesses.
It is envisaged that a proportion of the lone parents would be trained in childcare and would be advised of the associated financial benefits of working in childcare. JCP would provide a discretionary payment for child care based on individual circumstance (this will only apply for lone parents who have not already received funded childcare from JCP). Lone parents would again be expected to use their free entitlement for care before using JCP funded care.
The lone parents on the training would be a mixture of those signposted by DWP (who will have already been through the ‘Launch Pad’ programme so will be ready for the next step and formal qualifications), and those directed by the advisor following outreach and engagement activities. It is envisaged of the 30 courses being provided there will be a 50/50 split (15 from DWP and 15 from the advisor).
**Suggested strategic partners**
- Jobcentre Plus
- Amy Johnson Children’s Centre
- Tweeddale Children’s Centre
- Carshalton College
- Major businesses in London Borough of Sutton
- Other Children’s Centres in London Borough of Sutton
- Benefits service in London Borough of Sutton
Average costs of childcare within the borough are:
- **Day nursery for children under 2 years:**
- 25 hours care per week: £122
- 50 hours care per week: £242
- **Day nursery for children aged 2+ years:**
- 25 hours care per week: £123
- 50 hours care per week: £245
- **Childminder for children under 2 years:**
- 25 hours care per week: £124
- 50 hours care per week: £247
- **Childminder for children aged 2+ years:**
- 25 hours care per week: £124
- 50 hours care per week: £249
The Amy Johnson Children’s centre have indicated that crèche cost £12-£15/worker/hour. They have also advised that usually 2 workers/carers are required and would provide one of these for free.
| Specification – Required outputs, results and unit costs | 85 | | Number of projects to be funded and Borough | 1 - London Borough of Sutton | |------------------------------------------|----------------------------| | Project Timescale | Start | End | | Delivery period | July 2013 | 31/12/2014 | | Final Evaluation | | 31/01/2015 |
| Outputs for payment | Number | Unit cost | Total | Must be achieved by | |---------------------|--------|-----------|-------|---------------------| | Number of participants receiving 6+ hours of support (IAG, job search, mentoring, training) | 58 | £313 | £18,154 | 30/06/2014 | | Number of participants achieving a full qualification at NVQ level 2 | 30 | £700 | £21,000 | 31/12/2014 | | Childcare fund | 1 | £4,000 | £4,000 | 31/12/2014 | | Submission of final evaluation report | 1 | £1,692 | £1,692 | 31/01/2015 |
| Results for payment | Number | Unit cost | Total | |---------------------|--------|-----------|-------| | Number of participants in employment within 13 weeks of leaving the project | 28 | £879 | £24,612 | 30/06/2014 | | Number of participants in sustained employment for 26 weeks (6M) | 18 | £1,419 | £25,542 | 31/12/2014 | | Maximum funding available | - | - | £95,000 |
26 Please note this element of the contract will be paid on an actual costs basis. The successful bidder will have to demonstrate evidence of defrayed expenditure to claim against this output. 17. Project duration
Projects will be funded between the dates specified on each individual tender specification. Please note that projects will start no earlier than 1st July 2013 and end no later than 30th June 2015.27
All claimable outputs and results, must be delivered and claimed within the project start and end dates and before the achieved by date listed in each project specification payments table, those dates supersede those listed above.
18. Soft outcomes
Recognising individuals’ personal achievements, or soft outcomes, is an important part of helping people towards finding suitable employment. These ‘soft outcomes’ include for example, helping people to acquire greater self-confidence in their potential or taking steps to overcome barriers to employment.
You will be expected to measure the ‘distance travelled’ by participants while on the project, based on prior assessment and recording of suitable steps. This may take the form of progress reports or self-assessment questionnaires. You will be expected to compile an evaluation report on your project at project close, which will include an assessment of soft outcomes for participants. You should therefore ensure that you collect information on soft outcomes for each participant throughout the lifetime of the project. Organisations unfamiliar with the measurement of soft outcomes will be able to access support and guidance to develop such measures.
Employability Performance Rating
ESF funded projects in London are required to implement the Employability Performance Rating system. The Performance Rating is a comprehensive tool to benchmark the achievements of employability service providers in London. The rating system awards a rating of between four and zero stars against three key areas: delivery performance, quality and contract compliance. Ratings are made public and published biannually. Funded projects will be required to complete the performance rating calculator (PRC) quarterly. One of the requirements is a standardised client completed feedback form. It is expected that this requirement will be integrated into successful bidders soft outcomes measurement systems.
More information about the PRC requirements will be provided during the contracting process and the reporting systems will be provided to you, however an overview of the requirements can be found here: http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/employment-skills/working-partnership/london-employability-performance-rating and http://data.london.gov.uk/datastore
The London Directory of ESF Skills and Employment Services is a new online database that enables advisers to search for services to support workless individuals into employment.
27 Bidders against the LB Sutton specifications should note that the end date for this project is 31/12/2014. It provides a single point of access to information on ESF funded skills and employment services across London funded by the Skills Funding Agency, National Offender Management Service (NOMS), London Councils, Greater London Authority and the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), including Work Programme provision.
All ESF and match-funded providers are expected to enter and maintain details of their provision on the London Directory of ESF Skills and Employment Services by completing the online form available from their respective co-financing organisation.
For further details on the directory, please visit the website www.esfdirectory.co.uk or contact the EPMU at the GLA by email to esfdirectory@london.gov.uk.
19. Added value
London Councils, the Boroughs and ESF wish to support projects that could not be delivered without its funding and which bring additional benefits to local and mainstream provision and individuals. This is called ‘added value’.
Your project may provide added value because it increases the number of people who receive the support they need to move towards work, or because it allows you to do more for people than would otherwise be permitted by other funding streams. Alternatively this funding may allow you to continue existing activity which would otherwise be cut back or it may allow you to develop new activities or to fill a gap in provision.
Subject to the eligibility criteria in Section 2, organisations which receive funding from any London Councils or ESF grants programme are welcome to apply for funding under this programme. However, your application should make very clear what additional activity, outputs or achievements you will deliver through this project. Organisations which have previously received a London Councils grant should note that, unlike other grants, the co-financing programme, only fund those costs which relate solely to the cost of the ESF funded project. 20. Financial information
London Councils ESF programmes pay providers on the basis of contracted unit costs. In other words, your project will be paid for the delivery of certain pre-specified outputs and results. The unit costs for each output and result are fixed, and are stated in each project specification. Bidders should note that London Councils reserves the right, in agreement with the participating boroughs, to reduce or increase the value of contracts by up to 100% in line with performance.
London Councils has worked in conjunction with the participating boroughs to develop unit costs for each of the project specifications. It is important to note that each project specification contains different unit costs. London Councils would advise your organisation to plan your project on the basis of the actual costs, your organisation should be able to compare the anticipated budget for delivering the specification with the funding available. Please note that London Councils expects that the project activities you are applying to deliver are not dependent on other sources of funding. By planning your delivery on the basis of actual costs, your organisation should be able to compare the anticipated budget for delivering the specification with the funding available. Please note that unless otherwise stated in the tender specification, the funding and number of outputs/results represent the maximum funding available.
You will be required to submit a project budget as part of your tender. Whilst you will be paid on the basis of contract costs, London Councils’ assessors will be looking at your project budget to check that your contract represents value for money, and that all costs included are ESF eligible. Assessors will also be checking to see that you have included enough staff in your budget to deliver the project. In addition, assessors will be checking that you have included adequate provision for participant support measures such as childcare and also for publicity. These factors will be taken into account as part of the award process.
Staff costs
In this section of the application form you should provide details of all the costs which relate to staffing your project. List the job title of the staff member involved and a short explanation of how the cost was calculated. If there are any other costs relating to staff (e.g. travel, subsistence etc.) you should include them in this section. You should give a brief explanation of how you calculated your costs, to enable assessors to clearly understand what is being funded.
For example -
| Item | Calculation | Amount | |-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|--------| | Trainer | 5hrs per month x 9 months x £16 per hr | £720 | | Travel to outreach centre | 1 person x £3 x 2 per wk x 34 weeks | £204 |
28 Unit costs may be subject to annual review. Participant costs In this section of the application form you should provide details of all the costs relating to items that you will provide to participants. For example, childcare, out of pocket travel costs, allowances, refreshments, equipment that participants may need for training (e.g. protective clothing), and so on. All entries should be itemised and calculations shown to explain the costs.
For example:
| Item | Calculation | Amount | |-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|----------| | Childcare/carer allowance | £50 per wk x 7 people x 34 weeks | £11,900 | | Travel | 10 people x £3 x 3 per wk x 34 weeks | £3,060 |
London Councils expects all projects to provide child or dependent care for participants as required in order to enable them to access the programme.
Other costs In this section of the application form you should provide details of any other costs of your project, which do not relate to staff or participants. This will include other direct and indirect costs of the project, for example, small items of equipment, exam fees, publicity materials, postage, photocopying etc. Indirect costs, which are shared organisational costs e.g. rent, utilities, that cannot be connected directly to project activity and which are difficult to attribute to the project may be claimed but must be apportioned appropriately.
Match funding Co-financing means that you apply for the full amount of your total project cost. The co-financing programme does not require you to produce additional match funding because this is being provided by London Councils and the participating boroughs. Your project should be designed so that the funding provided by the London Councils ESF Borough Programme covers all costs associated with it.
Eligible items of expenditure Funding can cover all the running costs of your project as long as they are ESF eligible (please see below) and you list them in your application. When budgeting, if some items are used for both this project and your other activities, you should apportion the cost as appropriate.
This funding does not cover capital expenditure; it only covers the costs associated with setting up and running your project. However you are permitted to include the purchase of small items of equipment under the value of £1000 per item which are necessary for the delivery of your project.29
29 The purchase of a computer is understood to be a maximum of £999 for the complete computer. You cannot claim separately for each component part such as the monitor, keyboard etc. The computer is to be a complete set up. Eligible
Staff costs:
- Administrative staff;
- Book keeping;
- Business counselling;
- Counselling and guidance;
- Project manager;
- Office manager;
- Outreach staff;
- Project co-ordinator;
- Staff recruitment;
- Staff training;
- Staff travel and subsistence;
- Trainer;
- Tutor; and
- Work experience co-ordinator.
Participant costs:
- Childcare;
- Subsistence;
- Training allowances; and
- Travel costs.
Please note that participant costs can’t be used to fund wage subsidies. Allowances made to participants should be discussed with their JCP advisor before being awarded, to avoid any conflict with their benefit entitlements.
Other costs:
- Advertising and promotion;
- Participant equipment and clothing;
- Cleaning;
- Consultancy;
- Copier rental;
- Depreciation of owned buildings;
- Depreciation of owned equipment;
- Equipment (small items under £1,000);
- Exam fees;
- Fax;
- Insurance;
- Operating equipment lease;
- Postage;
- Professional fees and costs;
- Rent;
- Room hire;
- Service charges; • Stationary and office supplies; • Telephones; and • Utilities.
The following items of expenditure will be ineligible for ESF support: • In-kind contributions which comprise the provision of land, real estate, equipment and unpaid voluntary work; • Purchase of furniture, vehicles and equipment (other than small items of equipment); • Purchase of second hand equipment; • Bank debit charges; • Legal fees; • Fines, financial penalties and expenses arising from litigation; • Purchase of land; • Purchase of real estate (i.e. buildings after construction and the land on which they are built); • Expenditure relating to venture capital, loan and guarantee funds. • Redundancy Costs
Applicants should ensure that the cost of tracking all participants for thirteen weeks when they leave a project has been considered and is built into the project budget. Likewise tracking those participants who progress to a positive employment result and any additional post-employment support offered to participants is also considered in any financial planning. 21. Publicity arrangements
ESF funding carries requirements to:
- ensure that potential and actual participants, project partners, and employers, are aware of the source of support;
- publicise project successes; and
- participate as far as is practicable in London and national ESF publicity initiatives, including providing information for public directories of projects and the Directory of London ESF Skills and Employment Services.
London Councils, borough and ESF logos should be present on all information and forms given to participants and included in all project publicity produced. Further guidance on publicity will be given to successful applicants. There is also an ESF Publicity Toolkit: [http://www.dwp.gov.uk/ef/resources/publicity/](http://www.dwp.gov.uk/ef/resources/publicity/) developed by ESFD for all organisations receiving ESF funds to use it to help review, support and enhance their ESF publicity measures and ensure contract compliance.
ESF funds a project, ESF Works, to showcase projects and products that illustrate the variety of activities taking place under the 2007–2013 European Social Fund (ESF) programme in England. Funded projects may be featured on the ESF Works website and all will have the opportunity to access the resources available there. Please see [http://www.esf-works.com/](http://www.esf-works.com/)
Funded projects will also be required to submit regular case studies using a provided template developed from the national ESF case-study template. Participants will need to be consulted and their permission sought to be used as case studies. These case studies may then be used in local and national publicity strategies.
All publicity materials developed to advertise or promote the project will need to be made available for inspection and approved prior to use. 22. Assessment process
Assessment against criteria All tenders submitted under this round will be carefully assessed against the criteria set out in this guidance, the questions asked in the application forms and the tender specifications and their fit with the stated objectives will be judged. This guidance fits within the framework of targets and objectives set out in the Co-financing Plan and projects must therefore contribute towards achieving the Co-financing Plan targets. Projects’ proposed outputs and value for money will also be assessed e.g. assessors will check your budget to see that you have given due consideration to staff numbers and participant costs, the track record of your organisation will also be considered. Funds are limited and not all projects which apply will receive funding. It is therefore important that you demonstrate in your project application how your project meets the criteria laid out in this guidance.
Your project must fit one of the specifications outlined in the separate tender specification document. Once the assessor is satisfied that your project and organisation is eligible for support, the rest of your application will be scored by awarding points against each of the assessment questions. Instructions on completing the tender form are included with each question in the application, and should be read carefully before you complete your answer. Each tender will be scored separately by two independent assessors. The tender form sets out the points available for each part of each question.
All applicants must achieve the minimum score on cross cutting themes (see Gateway Criteria, Section 5 above) in order to be considered for funding. Applicants who achieve sufficient points on this question will then be subject to a minimum quality threshold on the application as a whole: projects that score lower than 50% will not be funded, even if there is sufficient funding remaining.
References London Councils intends to reference delivery organisations through its network of Borough grants officers, to verify whether the organisation has experience of working within the Boroughs and with the particular participant group relevant to this application.
If you do not consider that the relevant officer has sufficient knowledge of your organisation to provide this reference, please supply details of an alternative referee in the tender form.
The appraisal panels Following scoring, an appraisal panel will be convened to assess each project on the criteria outlined above. The panel will comprise of senior representatives from the London Councils’ ESF team and the relevant borough(s). Other participants may be invited to join the appraisal panel should the number of applications warrant this. The appraisal panel will consider each project in score order, taking into account the further factors of value for money and the project’s fit within the strategic framework set out under the co-financing plan. Track record on previous London Councils and other funded provision will also be taken into account.
30 London Councils reserves the right to shortlist candidates and to invite organisations back for interview where scores against specifications are close and the panel cannot make a final decision without further information. The recommendations from the appraisal panel will then be presented to an independent external panel which will include:
- a representative from a suitable general voluntary sector umbrella organisation;
- other co-financing organisations; and
- representatives on behalf of the Managing Authority for ESF in London (the European Programmes Management Unit)
The external panel will take a strategic view of the projects submitted, including their duration, the extent to which they contribute to the co-financing plan and the Regional ESF Framework. This process will ensure that the projects chosen meet the aims and objectives outlined in London Councils’ ESF CFO Plan and the London Regional ESF Framework. It will also help to ensure that there is no duplication of activities. Track record of delivery for other funders may also be taken into account when making award decisions.
Following this panel meeting, results will be made available to applicants. All applicants will be provided with their scores, and unsuccessful projects will be given feedback about the reasons for the decision, if requested in writing. This feedback will include a summary of the assessors’ comments to help clarify the reasons for the decision. Unsuccessful applicants will be given the right of appeal on certain conditions. 23. Appeals
The selection process will be as open, objective and fair as possible but because the amount of funding available through London Councils ESF Borough Programme is limited, only a small number of projects can be funded. Applicants whose projects have not been selected for funding will have the right to appeal. There are two grounds for appeal following standard ESF practice.
For an appeal to be considered the applicant will need to make a case (by presenting convincing evidence in writing) that the scoring panel and/or appraisers had either:
- demonstrated bias against the proposed project; or
- made a decision that no reasonable person would make.
Due to the limited funding available, it is likely that a number of good proposals will not be successful. Most disappointed applicants tend to think that their tender deserved a higher score. However, a simple disagreement with the score will not suffice, nor will repetition of information already provided in the application. **No new information can be considered**, but clarification or further explanation of an answer could be relevant. An unsubstantiated allegation of bias or unreasonableness, or an appeal based on the fact that the project has been successful in the past will not be investigated further, and the appeal will fail. Your appeal therefore needs to be clear, state on what grounds it is based and then explain why this conclusion has been reached. Decisions reached after appeal will be final.
If London Councils agrees to consider an appeal the application will be re-scored independently (by people not involved in the original scoring) and re-appraised. This could result in an increase, a decrease or no change in the original total score. If the appeal is successful, London Councils will seek to enter into contract with the provider where possible.
24. Monitoring and reporting on your project
London Councils has to report to the Managing Authority for ESF on the progress of the ESF co-financing programme each quarter as part of the procedure for claiming funds. These reports will include data on participants, on project activities and on total expenditure.
Successful applicants will therefore be required to submit reports at the end of each quarter. These reports will enable London Councils to meet the ESF and its own reporting requirements but will also form the basis for monitoring your project progress and achievements. Successful projects may also be monitored by and have reports requested of them by the Borough providing the match funding.
Organisations will be given full advice in the pre-contracting phase on the information which must be recorded and reported and the implications for project procedures and systems. For further information see the [London Councils ESF Co-financing Plan](#).
All funded organisations that enter a contract with London Councils are required to store project records until 31 December 2022, this requirement will be written into your contract. London Councils provides guidance to funded organisations about the storing of project records electronically in line with ESF requirements. 25. Payment arrangements
London Councils will provide an advance payment to all funded organisations.
15% of the agreed grant will be paid in advance to providers upon satisfactory completion of funding agreements with London Councils. Payments in the final quarters of delivery will be reduced to take into account the initial first advance payment.
London Councils will then pay providers quarterly in arrears on the basis of contract costs. Projects will be paid for the delivery of pre-specified outputs. These are described in Section 9.
Please note: London Councils is generally unable to recover any Value Added Tax charged. Therefore, the maximum sum stated in the project specifications listed above includes any VAT or other taxes charged. Under the provision of item 5A to group 6 of schedule 9 of the VAT Act 1994, the supply of education or vocational training funded by London Councils, and the supply by the person providing that education or training, of any goods or services essential to that provision, is an exempt supply for VAT purposes. In addition, the maximum sum stated in the project specification should include provision for direct costs to participants such as childcare, travel, subsistence, or participant incentives. 26. Key initiatives
This section is included to inform providers of good practice being promoted and developed through national skills and employment initiatives and also those across London. When designing your project and writing your tender, you should consider how your organisation links with the following initiatives:
Department for Work and Pensions
The DWP have a number of major welfare to work reforms which aim to fight poverty, support the most vulnerable and help people break the cycle of benefit dependency as part of their Get Britain Working strategy. Further details of the full range of initiatives can be found here: [http://www.dwp.gov.uk/policy/welfare-reform/get-britain-working/#britain](http://www.dwp.gov.uk/policy/welfare-reform/get-britain-working/#britain)
Providers are expected to consider how their provision will be distinctive from these initiatives.
The Work Programme:
The Government is committed to fighting poverty and supporting the most vulnerable and helping people break the cycle of benefit dependency. As a result significant reforms to the welfare-to-work programmes currently available to Jobcentre Plus customers are being made.
The Spending Review 2010, announced on 20 October 2010, confirmed the DWP’s commitment to reform and the introduction of the Work Programme. The Work Programme represents a step change for Welfare to Work, it will replace much of the confusing array of existing programmes for unemployed people.
The Work Programme will base payments largely on results, and paying providers from the benefits saved from getting people into work. It is a partnership between Government and providers from across the public, private and third sectors - including social enterprises.
The Work Programme is now in place nationally.
The Work Programme delivers provision for, JSA and ESA individuals, and when Universal Credit is introduced it is expected to support similar relevant individuals.
Individuals will be referred onto the Work Programme at different milestones, and for some participants that referral may either be Mandatory or Voluntary.
| Customer Group | Time of Referral | Basis for referral | |----------------|------------------|--------------------| | Jobseekers Allowance customers aged 18 to 24 | From 9 months | Mandatory | | Jobseekers Allowance customers aged 25 and over | From 12 months | Mandatory | | Jobseeker Allowance - Early Access customers facing significant disadvantage (e.g. young people with significant barriers, NEETs, ex-offenders) | From 3 months | Mandatory or voluntary depending on circumstance | Jobseekers Allowance customers who have recently moved from Incapacity Benefit | From 3 months | Mandatory ---|---|--- All Employment Support Allowance customers including contribution based, work related activity unlikely to be fit for work in the short term and support group customers. | At any time | Voluntary Employment Support Allowance flow (income related) customers who are placed in the Work Related Activity Group and Support Group | At any time | Mandatory or voluntary depending on circumstance Ex-Incapacity Benefit Employment Support Allowance (income related) customers who are placed in the Work Related Activity Group and Support Group (who have recently moved from Incapacity Benefit) | At any time | Mandatory or voluntary depending on circumstance Income Support and incapacity benefit customers | At any time | Voluntary
Incapacity Benefit and Income Support customers who have undergone reassessment and have a known Work Capability Assessment outcome, will remain on the Work Programme if placed in the ESA Work Related Activity Group or on JSA, with the conditionality appropriate to their new benefit.
The London Region’s contract package areas (CPA) is split into East and West, with three Prime contractors in each CAP. These organisations are:
| West London | Ingeus UK Ltd | Maximus Employment UK Ltd | Reed in Partnership | |---|---|---|---| | East London | A4E Ltd | Careers Development Group (CDG) * | Seetec |
DWP has a Framework Agreement for the provision of employment related support services including the new Work Programme and the next round of ESF contracts.
The Framework competition was launched in June 2010 and information about the preferred suppliers was published in November 2010 and can be found on the DWP website through the link below.
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/welfare-to-work-services/framework-for-the-provision/
DWP ESF funds for 2011-2013 will focus on: • Support for disadvantaged customers claiming Incapacity Benefit or Income Support, through voluntary participation in the new Work Programme • Targeted support to tackle worklessness in families with multiple problems. • Day One Support for Young People (18-24)
Support for Families with Multiple Problems Provision aims to tackle entrenched worklessness in England by progressing people in families with multiple problems closer to employment.
The provision is aimed at families with multiple problems and complex needs where:
• At least one member of the family receives a DWP working age benefit; and • Either no one in the family is working, or there is a history of worklessness across generations.
This provision is voluntary and focuses on providing a whole family approach, making support available to individual family members across the generations. It involves Providers working closely with Local Authorities (LAs) to identify families who can benefit from this provision.
This provision will not duplicate, and should complement and align with, local provision
Primes will work with Local Authorities to explore local opportunities and to ensure that proposals are appropriate.
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/welfare-to-work-services/european-social-fund/support-for-families/
The ‘Day One support for Young People Trailblazer’ programme launched in autumn 2012. It is aimed at young people aged 18-24 who have never worked or with little work history. The project is time limited and is expected to run for around 11 months with 8 months referral. It is being delivered in the North and South London Districts by Maximus Employment and Training Ltd and Careers Development Group respectively. From the start of their claim members of the target group will be required to undertake a 13 week work placement which has to be of benefit to the community with a private or community-sector organisation - alongside provider-led jobsearch.
More details are available on DWP’s website: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/supplying-dwp/what-we-buy/welfare-to-work-services/day-one-support-young-people/
Skills Funding Agency
Register of Training Organisations
The Skills Funding Agency have a register of training organisations, it’s role is to: confirm which organisations with an existing funding agreement are suitable to continue to fund; to provide the Skills Funding Agency with a list of organisations that are eligible to be selected to be invited to tender for the provision of education and training services; to enable the Skills Funding Agency to identify which subcontractors (organisations who do not hold a direct contract) prime contractors need to be asked to undertake a higher level of due diligence, monitoring and review on.
http://skillsfundingagency.bis.gov.uk/providers/programmes/register/
All organisations wishing to deliver education and vocational training services on behalf of the Skills Funding Agency (including provision for adults co-financed by ESF) need to be on the Register.
ESF provision for 14-19 year olds
For 14-19 ESF provision, the Skills Funding Agency acts on behalf of the Young People’s Learning Agency (YPLA) to procure and contract manage ESF activity for young people.
In London, the Skills Funding Agency ran a tendering round for the provision of activity to support the ‘at risk of becoming NEET’ group, plus pre-Apprenticeship specifications for NEETs and those at risk of becoming NEET.
- New providers need to register on the portal in order to access the relevant documents.
- https://skillsfundingagency.bravosolution.co.uk/web/login.shtml
In the current ESF programme, running from 2007-13, the Skills Funding Agency is responsible for ESF learning provision to the 19+ age group.
It also manages ESF provision for learners aged 14-19, as a shared service for the Education Funding Agency (EFA). A technical document supporting the shared service agreement details specific issues such as match funding, audit and publicity.
For adults, the Skills Funding Agency primarily procures and manages ESF provision that helps to develop a skilled and adaptable workforce in England: to help unemployed people re-enter the labour market; to support individuals with low skills in employment; and to engage with the hardest to reach individuals.
For young people, ESF will support young people aged 14-19 who are not in education, employment or training (NEET) and those at risk of becoming so. They will likely be those who face multiple barriers to their participation and need a different type of offer of post 16 provision to engage them in learning and keep them engaged. The main focus of using ESF monies for the period 2011-13 will be in conjunction with the EFA, securing the continued provision of individually tailored packages of education and support, which will enable the engagement of such young people.
The Skills Funding Agency currently funds four ESF projects to support adults and young people.
1. **Skills Support for the Unemployed** ensures that capacity is in place to provide skills support to unemployed individuals on benefits who are looking for work but face a skills barrier to entering the labour market. The Agency procures provision which will ensure adults (aged 19 and over) are given the right level of skills and employability support that they need to improve their chances of gaining employment (including starting an Apprenticeship). This activity is delivered in partnership with the Apprenticeship Grant to Employers, which provides financing support to small employers taking on an apprentice as a progression from Skills Support for the Unemployed (SSU).
2. **Skills Support for Redundancy** provision ensures that capacity is in place to respond to redundancies and the employment implications of local economic conditions. The Agency procures training opportunities for individuals who are: under consultation or notice of redundancy; have been notified by their employer that they are likely to be directly affected by downsizing or company closure locally; or have recently been made unemployed.
3. Employed individuals with low skills can benefit from **Workplace Learning**, which promotes in-work progression through the delivery of work related skills training. The Skills Funding Agency is seeking to fund provision that will raise their level of attainment, enabling individuals to improve their employment status and to move on to undertake higher levels of training.
There should be particular focus on those more vulnerable to future unemployment, with barriers to achieving sustainable employment, such as individuals aged 19-24 who are not in education, employment or training (NEET) and who are recently unemployed.
4. For the ESF Programme in England, the Skills Funding Agency also manages **Community Grants**. This project provides grants of up to £12,000 to allow small third sector organisations, which would not normally be able to access ESF, through simplified arrangements. These grants support a range of activities that help individuals in the hardest to reach communities to enter the labour market. Community Grants funding must not duplicate provision made available through mainstream ESF activity from the Skills Funding Agency.
A series of grant co-ordinating bodies administer Community Grants for the Skills Funding Agency on a regional basis. They publicise the availability of grants as well as providing support to successful applicants. In London this activity is coordinated by London Councils.
In addition to these four main projects, the Skills Funding Agency will also use ESF to contribute additional and enhanced provision to mainstream programmes such as Apprenticeships. ESF will add value by preparing participants with pre-Apprenticeship training and supporting access to and progression within Apprenticeships and other Workplace Learning.
**Greater London Authority (GLA)**
Co-funded by the [European Social Fund](https://www.gov.uk/european-social-fund), the GLA's new Youth programme's focus is the provision of skills, employment and training to support vulnerable young Londoners. Helping young people to succeed in education and preparing them for work is key to the economic success of the capital. The Mayor has identified this as a priority in his Young Londoners - successful futures plan.
The GLA’s ESF programme will give young people opportunities to improve their skills and increase their chances to access further education and long-term sustainable employment.
The GLA’s ESF Youth Programme Prospectus which contains the detailed Statement of Requirements for each youth project was published on 28 February 2012. The procurement for this funding round has closed.
**National Offender Management Service (NOMS)**
Following conclusion of the procurement exercise for the second round of the NOMS European Social Fund co-financing programme (2011 – 2014), the award of the London Prime Provider contract went to Working Links (Employment) Ltd.
The fundamental objective of the contract is to enhance the employability prospects of offenders by bridging the existing gaps between offenders and mainstream education, skills and employment services before, during and after release from custody. The Contract complements, rather than duplicates or competes with existing service arrangements with delivery built around a case management model operating across both custody and the community. In addition, there is a focus on specified hard-to-help groups (i.e. sub-projects) in the region.
The selected Prime Providers have named and engaged with a range of sub-contractors to ensure successful delivery of regional targets. The supply chain for the contracts show a good mix of organisations from different sectors, including probation trusts, private sector businesses, charities and voluntary and community groups.
The following project was also launched in London to continue ‘NOMS’ commitment to develop a mutually beneficial relationship with the social enterprise sector:
**Furnish – Overview:** Vehicle and Warehouse assistants will collect and deliver furniture to customers and sort warehouse orders. Provision of ‘Fit Out’ services for landlords, e.g. curtaining and flooring. Office assistants will undertake a wide range of office services, from telephone answering to product ordering and client interaction.
**ESF Technical Assistance (TA) Projects**
Technical Assistance is provided under Priority 3 of the London 2007-13 European Social Fund (ESF) Programme. It supports programme implementation, including programme management and development to reinforce the administrative capacity.
**London Datastore**
Applicants are encouraged to make use of the labour market information available on the datastore, which includes statistics at borough level: [http://data.london.gov.uk/datastore](http://data.london.gov.uk/datastore). The London Skills and Employment Observatory was recently integrated with the London Datastore.
**The Age and Employment Network (TAEN)**
TAEN works to promote an effective labour market that serves the needs of people in mid and later life, employers and the economy.
TAEN run a national TA project nationally to support the national ESF programme’s objectives related to people aged 50+. They aim to:
- to raise awareness and spreading information and understanding of the specific issues people face in the labour market as they get older and wish to maintain or extend their working lives;
- to assist organisations involved in the ESF programme to work effectively with older clients in order to help them remain in or return to work;
- to highlight examples of good practice;
- to strengthen the focus on participants aged 50 and over.
[http://taen.org.uk/esf](http://taen.org.uk/esf)
**London Voluntary Service Council (LVSC)**
LVSC delivers an ESF funded TA project to enhance support for voluntary/community organisations seeking to access ESF funding. The project also facilitates partnership working between providers in London.
In general LVSC aims to:
- Lead the London voluntary and community sector in developing the strategy for learning & skills and in promoting this to the policy makers.
- Help voluntary and community sector organisations to provide high quality training/services by and for socially excluded groups in London with particular attention to funds available from the European Union.
[http://www.lvsc.org.uk/](http://www.lvsc.org.uk/)
**GLE Borough ESF TA Project**
GLE is currently providing support to help London local authorities influence, plan and engage in the delivery of ESF provision in their area. They will be launching a new webpage dedicated to this project during September 2012, but if you have any questions in the meantime, please email james.h@gle.co.uk.
**Green Mark**
Green Mark is an environmental certification which is being offered free to ESF funded organisations. Green Mark helps organisations to improve environmental and economic sustainability through awareness and integrating environmental measures within their operations. The TA project will offer support to organisations to undertake the Green Mark accreditation including telephone and email support during the process. There is a limited amount of support available and organisations will be supported on a first-come-first-served basis.
http://greenmark.co.uk/
ESF WORKS ESF Works is the showcase and forum for policy & practice lessons from the 2007-2013 ESF programme in England. ESF-works regularly collect case studies and share best practice from all the ESF projects across the country.
http://www.esf-works.com/
Other Initiatives
Changes to benefits: Universal Credit The DWP is planning an overhaul of the current method of payments in the welfare system. It is the Coalition Government’s intention to introduce legislation to reform the welfare system by creating a new Universal Credit. When designing these specifications this planned change has been taken into account, prospective projects are advised to consider how they will adapt to the changes. Further information is available in the White Paper: http://www.dwp.gov.uk/policy/welfare-reform/legislation-and-key-documents/universal-credit/
Community budgets Community budgets represent a shift in how central government funding is directed to boroughs and how that funding is allocated.
- Pool various strands of central funding into a single ‘pot’ for tackling social problems. Boroughs then allocate the funding against the priorities in their region.
- Over the next few years this method of allocation is expected to be rolled out across the country.
- Community budgets are now running in 16 areas. In London the boroughs are:
- Barnet
- Croydon
- Islington
- Lewisham
- Westminster,
- Hammersmith and Fulham,
- Kensington & Chelsea
- Wandsworth
Further information can be found here: http://www.communities.gov.uk/news/corporate/1748111
The Mayors Economic Development Strategy The Economic Development Strategy sets out the vision with respect to the London economy, and how it can be realised. The Mayor’s ambitions are for London to be the World Capital of Business, and to have the most competitive business environment in the world; to be one of the world’s leading low carbon capitals, for all Londoners to share in London’s economic success and for London to maximise the benefits of the 2012 Olympic and Paralympic games.
The Economic Development Strategy is a call to action for all those involved in London’s economy and concerned with its success.
http://www.london.gov.uk/who-runs-london/mayor/publications/business-and-economy/eds
London Enterprise Panel
The London Enterprise Panel’s role is to advise the Mayor on actions to provide strategic investment to support private sector growth and employment in London; promote enterprise and innovation; promote the acquisition of skills for sustained employment in London; and Protect and enhance London’s competitiveness.
£41m has been allocated to the LEP to unlock potential areas of growth in the capital, and an additional £70 million Growing Places Fund (GPF), was awarded to the London Enterprise Panel in the March Budget.
http://www.london.gov.uk/business-economy/working-partnership/lep and http://www.london.gov.uk/moderngov/ieListMeetings.aspx?CId=253
National Apprenticeships Service (NAS)
Apprenticeships are a key part of the post-16 education offer and will play a central role in the Government’s plans for growing skills in the economy. World-class Apprenticeships: Unlocking Talent, Building Skills for All, published by the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS) and the Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) in January 2008, indicated the Government’s intention to increase the Apprenticeship opportunities available through those employers already offering high-quality Apprenticeships.
The National Apprenticeship Service (NAS) was announced in January 2008 and officially launched in April 2009. Reporting to the Departments for Innovation, Universities and Skills (DIUS) and Children, Schools and Families (DCSF), the service will drive forward the Government’s ambition for Apprenticeships. The service aims to bring about a significant growth in the number of employers offering Apprenticeships.
The NAS will assume total responsibility for the delivery of Apprenticeships that includes: Employer Services; Learner Services; and a web-based vacancy matching system. This online system enables individuals to search and apply for live vacancies and allows employers, and their training providers to advertise their vacancies to a wide range of interested applicants.
For more information on Apprenticeships, please go to http://www.apprenticeships.org.uk/About-Us/National-Apprenticeship-Service.aspx Diversity Works Diversity Works for London is the Mayor of London's campaign to engage organisations in harnessing the benefits of a diverse workforce and supplier base, providing all Londoners with a chance to share in the city's opportunities and prosperity.
The website includes practical tools to implement diversity in the workplace. Providers can consider using these tools when working with employers within ESF projects (for more information, please see http://www.diversityworksforlondon.com).
Skills for Life Skills for Life include supporting adult learners with improving their basic literacy, numeracy, language and ICT skills. English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL) training forms part of Skills for Life.
Further Education and Skills Providers delivering skills are advised to refer to relevant Government reports when planning projects.
The Government’s strategy for skills and reform of the further education and skills system can be found here: https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/improving-the-quality-of-further-education-and-skills-training
In November 2010 the government set out their vision in Skills for Sustainable Growth and the funding to support this. In December 2011 they published New Challenges, New Chances, their reform plan building on Skills for Sustainable Growth, and the Skills Investment Statement 2011-2014.
Unionlearn Unionlearn was established by the TUC to help unions to become learning organisations, with programmes for union representatives and regional officers and strategic support for national officers.
National Careers Service – Information, Advice and Guidance The National Careers Service provides information, advice and guidance to help you make decisions on learning, training and work opportunities. The service offers confidential, helpful and impartial advice, supported by qualified careers advisers. (https://nationalcareersservice.direct.gov.uk/Pages/Home.aspx).
Skills for Business – Sector Skills Councils The Skills for Business network aims to boost the productivity and profitability of the UK by identifying and tackling skills gaps and shortages on a sector by sector basis. In short, they aim to get the right people with the right skills in the right place at the right time.
The Skills for Business network is made up of 25 Sector Skills Councils (SSCs) – each one is an employer-led, independent organisation. The UK Commission for Employment and Skills and the Alliance of Sector Skills Councils underpin the network.
Projects tendering for ESF under this ITT are advised to liaise with the relevant SSC for the identified sector being targeted (see http://www.sscalliance.org). 27. Contacts
For technical queries regarding the application process please contact:
**David Jones**, London Councils ESF Co-financing Programme Manager david.jones@londoncouncils.gov.uk 020 7934 9952
or
**Stephen Boon**, Head of Community Services and Grants. stephen.boon@londoncouncils.gov.uk 020 7934 9951
http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/grants
For other support, including a discussion of your project, please contact:
**Steve Kerr**, Policy Officer – Employment and Skills steve@lvsc.org.uk 020 7832 5811
London Voluntary Service Council (LVSC) 2nd floor, 200a Pentonville Road London N1 9JP
http://www.lvsc.org.uk/
If you wish to contact the borough in which your project will take place, please see below:
| Name | Organisation | Contact details | |-----------------|--------------|----------------------------------| | Alka Nepali | Brent | alka.nepali@brent.gov.uk | | Anna Loughlin | Enfield | Anna.loughlin@enfield.gov.uk | | Jason Davis | Hackney | Jason.Davis@Hackney.gov.uk | | Amanda Lewsey | Havering | amanda.lewsey@havering.gov.uk | | Lorraine Roberts| Islington | Lorraine.Roberts@islington.gov.uk| | Julie Khan | Redbridge | Julie.Khan@redbridge.gov.uk | | Matthew Robson | Sutton | Matthew.Robson@sutton.gov.uk | | London Co-financing Organisations: | |-----------------------------------| | **London Councils** | | David Jones | | London Councils ESF Programme Manager | | Contact details above | | Stephen Boon (London Councils) | | Head of Grants and Community Services | | Contact details above | | London Councils | | 59 ½ Southwark Street | | London | | SE1 0AL | | http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk | | **London Development Agency** | | Julie Sexton | | Senior Manager - Programme Delivery | | 020 7983 5610 | | julie.sexton@london.gov.uk | | ESF Delivery Unit, Communities and Intelligence, Greater London Authority | | City Hall, The Queen’s Walk | | More London | | London SE1 2AA | | http://www.london.gov.uk/ | | **Skills Funding Agency** | | Joyce Roberts | | Joyce.roberts@skillsfundingagency.bis.gov.uk | | Neil Roberts | | Neil.Roberts@skillsfundingagency.bis.gov.uk | | Skills Funding Agency | | Cheylesmore House | | Quinton Road | | Coventry | | CV1 2WT | | http://skillsfundingagency.bis.gov.uk/ | | **Jobcentre Plus/Department of Work and Pensions** | | Philip Naniewski | | Regional ESF Manager for London | | 020 7342 3106 | | 07961 130359 | | philip.naniewski@jobcentreplus.gsi.gov.uk | | Jobcentre Plus | | Office of the Director | | European Social Fund | | Tresco House | | 65 Lisson Grove | | London NW1 6UW | | http://www.jobcentreplus.gov.uk | | **NOMS** | | Sharon Flynn | | Regional Engagement Manager London | | Directorate of Commissioning and Commercial Development | | 030 0047 5866 | | Sharon.Flynn@noms.gsi.gov.uk | | National Offender Management Service | | 2.08, Clive House, 70 Petty France | | London | | SW1H 9EX | | http://www.justice.gov.uk/about/noms/ | Annex 1. Sustainable development: Further information
What is Sustainable Development? Sustainable Development is a process that seeks to ensure a better quality of life for everyone, now and for generations to come. It does this by integrating social, environmental and economic considerations equally into everything we do. It recognises that social, economic and environmental issues are interdependent and therefore activity in one of these areas should not be pursued in isolation but with consideration for each of the other areas as well.
National Context
The coalition government is committed to being the greenest government ever. It is taking action to cut carbon emissions, create the conditions for green growth, and improve resilience to climate change – all of which is necessary for delivering sustainable development and long term economic growth.
The Secretaries of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and for Energy and Climate Change will take the lead in mainstreaming sustainable development across government, and work is underway to develop the governance and framework for achieving this.
In addition, government aims to lead by example by reducing the emissions of the government estate by 10% and ensuring government purchases sustainable goods and services.
The Department for Work and Pensions is committed to building sustainable development into all its policies, plans and decisions as well as procuring sustainable goods and services.
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/esf/resources/sustainable-development/#q3
Sustainable development training tools to design and implement a sustainable development policy and plan are available from:
http://www.dwp.gov.uk/esf/resources/sustainable-development/sustainable-development-tools/
Regional Context
The Mayor has a clear vision of London being recognised as a world leader in improving the environment locally and globally. He is focusing on realising this vision through big, bold programmes for improvement and an ongoing determination to encourage everyone to get involved and work together.
London is striving to be one of the greenest cities in the world. This is the only way we will preserve and improve London and the quality of life of all Londoners and in so doing lead the world in tackling environmental issues. The Mayor has set out his overriding environmental strategy in Leading to a greener London, an environment programme for the capital.
This is supported by strategies focusing on air quality, water, waste, noise, biodiversity, climate change adaptation, climate change mitigation and energy.
More details about all of the above can be found at: http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/environment
**Application Process and Information**
As part of the application process you will have to illustrate how you have considered and integrated into your project all the three elements of sustainable development: social, economic and environmental. There will also be an accompanying sustainable development checklist that you will have to complete and you should use this to identify the activity that you will provide further information on in the sustainable development section of the application form. Annex 2. Checklist – Health cross cutting theme
The ESF programmes have potential to improve the health of Londoners.
Below are some key questions that you should consider when developing your project. These should help your project meet the requirements of the new health cross-cutting theme in the London ESF Programme.
Some questions will be more relevant than others, as some projects will specifically aim to get people with health problems into work.
There is no expectation that every project will answer yes to each question.
| | Question | YES/NO | |---|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------| | 1 | Is your project working with individuals with health issues including those with mental ill health issues? | | | 2 | Have you contacted your Primary Care Trust (PCT) and local Health Improvement Programme in order to develop your project? | | | 3 | Have you considered the links with sustainable development and equalities objectives? | | | 4 | Will your project offer health promotion information to your participants? | | | 5 | Will your project refer individuals onto health services locally, where this is appropriate? | | Annex 3. Core Participant MI Requirement (ESF and Match)
**Identification data**
- Priority Project Number
- Transfer Date
NOTE: Characteristics such as Region, Objective and Priority can be derived from the above project number.
**Individual participant details**
| Variable | Descriptors | Definition | |--------------|----------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | All starters | | | | Gender | Male/Female | The gender of the participant | | Age | Date of Birth | The full date of birth of the participant | | Identifier | Participant identifier | The unique number by which the CFO identifies an individual participant. May be required for follow up surveys. | | Location | Postcode | The full postcode of the address that the participant resides at | | Participation| Start date | The date that the participant started on the ESF project. | | Status | Employed | Participants who are in paid employment on the day they commence an ESF project. |
______________________________________________________________________
31 For DWP, this is the 12 digit numeric client reference no. For LSC, this is the provider code followed by the client number. 32 A MI participant record is required for each participation in the programme by an individual. | Variable | Descriptors | Definition | |--------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | participant must work 8 hours or more per week. | This includes: | | | | • Employees (people who work for a company and have their National Insurance paid directly from their wages) and | | | | • Self-employed (people who work for themselves and generally pay their National Insurance themselves). | | Unemployed | Participants who are without a job and available to start work and looking for work, or waiting to start a job that has already been obtained, as at the date they started on the ESF project. This includes people who are working fewer than 16 hours a week but who are signing on and report their earnings to Jobcentre Plus. | | Economically inactive | Participants who are not employed, but who do not satisfy the ILO criteria for unemployment. This is because they are either not seeking work or are unavailable to start work. | | Full time education or training | A participant who satisfies one of the following criteria but is not a 14-19 NEET: | • Full-time education either in a school, A FE Institution or a HE institution | | | | • In full-time Work-based learning (including apprenticeships, Entry to Employment and NVQ learning) | | | | Other education or training (including independent colleges or training centres or receiving training or part-time education but not currently employed. | | 14 -19 NEET | Participants aged 14-19 who on joining an ESF project who are not in: | |
33 The values for ‘status’ are mutually exclusive i.e. a participant can only belong to one of these categories not more than one. | Variable | Descriptors | Definition | |----------|-------------|------------| | | | - Full-time education either in a school, A FE Institution or a HE institution or\
| | | - Work-based learning (including apprenticeships, Entry to Employment and NVQ learning or\
| | | - Other education or training (including independent colleges or training centres or receiving training or part-time education but not currently employed) or\
| | | - Employment\
| | | And\
| | | Participants aged 14 and 15 who are at risk of becoming NEET when they leave school, for example those identified by the Connexions Service as needing ‘support’ or ‘intensive support’. | | If unemployed | Length of unemployment on starting | Only for those whose status is Unemployed. Set to zero for participants who are not unemployed.\
| | < 6 months | Information on length of unemployment to be provided using bandings provided (i.e. less than six months; 6-11 months etc). | | | 6 – 11 months |\
| | 12 – 23 months |\
| | 24 – 35 months |\
| | 36 + months |
34 Young people in part-time learning (less than 16 hours) are included in ‘full-time education and training’ and are not counted as NEET. | Variable | Descriptors | Definition | |-------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------| | Ethnicity | **White**<br>1) British<br>2) Irish<br>3) Other<br><br>**Mixed**<br>4) White and Black Caribbean<br>5) White and Black African<br>6) White and Asian<br>7) Other mixed background<br><br>**Asian or Asian British**<br>8) Indian<br>9) Pakistani<br>10) Bangladeshi<br>11) Other Asian background<br><br>**Black or Black British**<br>12) Caribbean<br>13) African<br>14) Other Black background<br><br>**Chinese or other ethnic group**<br>15) Chinese<br>16) Any other ethnic group<br><br>**Prefer not to say**<br>17) Not stated |
35 One only of the 17 ethnicity options to be used for each participant. | Disability | Disabled/with health conditions (Yes/No) | Participants who on joining an ESF project report having a: | |------------|----------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------| | | | - Work-limiting disability or learning difficulty (which includes long term health problems); or | | | | - A current disability covered by the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). | | | | A ‘work-limiting disability’ is a long-term health problem disability or learning difficulty that affects the amount or type of work a person can do. | | | | The DDA defines disability as a ‘physical or mental impairment which has a substantial and long-term adverse effect on a person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities. To count as disabling under this definition an impairment must be physical or mental, have a substantial adverse effect on day to day activities and be long-term. | | | | When this variable is set to ‘yes’ this indicates that the participant has either indicated that they have a disability or suffer from a health condition or have a disability and also suffer from a health condition. | | | | When set to ‘no’ this indicates that a participant has indicated that they do not have a disability and do not suffer from a health condition | | Highest level of qualification held | None | Participants who do not have a QCA defined relevant qualification at any level. | |-----------------------------------|------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Below Level 1 | | Participants who on starting ESF do not have a relevant full qualification at level 1 or above (as defined in the QCA National Qualifications Framework). | | Level 1 or equivalent | | Participants who on starting ESF have a relevant full qualification at level 1 or the equivalent | | Level 2 or equivalent | | Participants who on starting ESF have a relevant full qualification at level 2 or the equivalent | | Level 3 or equivalent | | Participants who on starting ESF have a relevant full qualification at level 3 or the equivalent | | Level 4 or equivalent | | Participants who on starting ESF have a relevant full qualification at level 4 or the equivalent | | Level 5 or higher or equivalent | | Participants who on starting ESF have a relevant full qualification at level 5 or the equivalent | | Not known | | This value indicates that it is not known which relevant qualifications the participant does or does not hold. |
(N.B ‘Relevant’ means a qualification relevant to the sector in which a participant is working or seeking to work. For example, a participant may have academic qualifications at level 2 but these may not be relevant to the sector or occupation. Or a participant may have a level 2 vocational qualification which relates to an old or declining industry, and is not relevant to their current sector or organisation).
______________________________________________________________________
36 These values are mutually exclusive i.e. it is only the highest level relevant qualification for a participant that is recorded. | Date of leaving | End date | The date that the participant left the ESF project | |----------------|----------|--------------------------------------------------| | Leaving status | | | | Employed | | Participants who are in employment within 13 weeks of leaving an ESF project in a job that lasts for 8 hours or more per week. This includes employees and self-employed people. | | Unemployed | | Participants who on leaving the ESF project are unemployed. | | Economically inactive | | Participants who on leaving the ESF project are economically inactive | | Into education or training | | Participants who on leaving the ESF project are in education or training | | 14 – 19 NEET | | Participants who are classified as '14-19 NEET' on leaving the ESF project |
37 The values for 'leaving status' are mutually exclusive i.e. a participant can only belong to one category. | Qualifications gained | Gained no qualification | Participants who did not acquire any relevant new qualifications after participating in the ESF project | |-----------------------|-------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Gained basics skills qualifications | A participant who gained a Skills for Life entry level, level 1 or level 2 qualification in literacy or numeracy or language (e.g. ESOL) or ICT, as a result of the ESF project (even if the qualification is awarded after the participant has left the project). | | Gained Level 1 | A participant who acquired a relevant level 1 qualification as a result of participating in the ESF project. | | Gained Level 2 | A participant who acquired a relevant level 2 qualification as a result of participating in the ESF project. | | Gained Level 3 | A participant who acquired a relevant level 3 qualification as a result of participating in the ESF project. | | Gained Level 4 | A participant who acquired a relevant level 4 qualification as a result of participating in the ESF project. | | Gained Level 5 or higher | A participant who acquired a relevant level 5 qualification as a result of participating in the ESF project. |
38 These values are not mutually exclusive. Any qualification that a participant has acquired must be recorded i.e. a participant may acquire one or more qualifications. | Priority 2 and 5 leavers | |-------------------------| | Date of leaving | End date | The date that the participant left the project | | Leaving status | Into education or training (Yes/No) | Participants who on leaving the ESF project are in education or training | | Qualifications gained | Gained no qualification | Gained basic skills qualifications | Gained Level 1 | Gained units or modules of level 2 qualifications | Gained Level 2 | Gained units or modules of level 3 qualifications | Gained Level 3 | Gained units or modules of level 4 qualifications | Gained Level 4 | Gained Level 5 or higher | |-----------------------|-------------------------|-----------------------------------|---------------|-----------------------------------------------|---------------|-----------------------------------------------|---------------|-----------------------------------------------|---------------|-------------------------| | | A participant, who did not acquire any relevant new qualifications after participating in the ESF project | A participant who acquired a Skills for Life qualification as a result of participating in the ESF project | A participant who acquired a relevant level 1 qualification as a result of participating in the ESF project | A participant who gains at least one unit or module of a level 2 qualification, but not a full level 2 qualification as a result of participating in an ESF project | A participant who acquired a relevant level 2 qualification as a result of participating in the ESF project | A participant who gains at least one unit or module of a level 3 qualification, but not a full level 3 qualification as a result of participating in an ESF project | A participant who acquired a relevant level 3 qualification as a result of participating in the ESF project | A participant who gains at least one unit or module of a level 4 qualification, but not a full level 4 qualification as a result of participating in an ESF project | A participant who acquired a relevant level 4 qualification as a result of participating in the ESF project | A participant who acquired a relevant level 5 qualification as a result of participating in the ESF project. |
39 These values are not mutually exclusive. Any qualification that a participant has acquired must be recorded i.e. a participant may acquire one or more qualifications.
[^3]: http://www.london.gov.uk/esf/regional-framework
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0188-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 122,
"total-input-tokens": 246874,
"total-output-tokens": 54597,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
485,
1
],
[
485,
4489,
2
],
[
4489,
4489,
3
],
[
4489,
5966,
4
],
[
5966,
8806,
5
],
[
8806,
10249,
6
],
[
10249,
12480,
7
],
[
12480,
14783,
8
],
[
14783,
16406,
9
],
[
16406,
17162,
10
],
[
17162,
19135,
11
],
[
19135,
20392,
12
],
[
20392,
22117,
13
],
[
22117,
24056,
14
],
[
24056,
24266,
15
],
[
24266,
25214,
16
],
[
25214,
25821,
17
],
[
25821,
27825,
18
],
[
27825,
28286,
19
],
[
28286,
28661,
20
],
[
28661,
32019,
21
],
[
32019,
33600,
22
],
[
33600,
36239,
23
],
[
36239,
38223,
24
],
[
38223,
40880,
25
],
[
40880,
43408,
26
],
[
43408,
43688,
27
],
[
43688,
46531,
28
],
[
46531,
47653,
29
],
[
47653,
50174,
30
],
[
50174,
50706,
31
],
[
50706,
53615,
32
],
[
53615,
55691,
33
],
[
55691,
57461,
34
],
[
57461,
59162,
35
],
[
59162,
62150,
36
],
[
62150,
64548,
37
],
[
64548,
67605,
38
],
[
67605,
68423,
39
],
[
68423,
71221,
40
],
[
71221,
72187,
41
],
[
72187,
73281,
42
],
[
73281,
76773,
43
],
[
76773,
78449,
44
],
[
78449,
81173,
45
],
[
81173,
81740,
46
],
[
81740,
84666,
47
],
[
84666,
87098,
48
],
[
87098,
88198,
49
],
[
88198,
90055,
50
],
[
90055,
92949,
51
],
[
92949,
93883,
52
],
[
93883,
96188,
53
],
[
96188,
97397,
54
],
[
97397,
98775,
55
],
[
98775,
101127,
56
],
[
101127,
103414,
57
],
[
103414,
105908,
58
],
[
105908,
108983,
59
],
[
108983,
111603,
60
],
[
111603,
113389,
61
],
[
113389,
114317,
62
],
[
114317,
116043,
63
],
[
116043,
117653,
64
],
[
117653,
119030,
65
],
[
119030,
121982,
66
],
[
121982,
123211,
67
],
[
123211,
126620,
68
],
[
126620,
129386,
69
],
[
129386,
131603,
70
],
[
131603,
132605,
71
],
[
132605,
135653,
72
],
[
135653,
137019,
73
],
[
137019,
139658,
74
],
[
139658,
143086,
75
],
[
143086,
145592,
76
],
[
145592,
147108,
77
],
[
147108,
149831,
78
],
[
149831,
151666,
79
],
[
151666,
152837,
80
],
[
152837,
154769,
81
],
[
154769,
156744,
82
],
[
156744,
157815,
83
],
[
157815,
160268,
84
],
[
160268,
162648,
85
],
[
162648,
164087,
86
],
[
164087,
166909,
87
],
[
166909,
168852,
88
],
[
168852,
171862,
89
],
[
171862,
174607,
90
],
[
174607,
175627,
91
],
[
175627,
176678,
92
],
[
176678,
178503,
93
],
[
178503,
181811,
94
],
[
181811,
183127,
95
],
[
183127,
186277,
96
],
[
186277,
187531,
97
],
[
187531,
190143,
98
],
[
190143,
192086,
99
],
[
192086,
194721,
100
],
[
194721,
197549,
101
],
[
197549,
200270,
102
],
[
200270,
203051,
103
],
[
203051,
205406,
104
],
[
205406,
207509,
105
],
[
207509,
210019,
106
],
[
210019,
212697,
107
],
[
212697,
214053,
108
],
[
214053,
216428,
109
],
[
216428,
218743,
110
],
[
218743,
219644,
111
],
[
219644,
220931,
112
],
[
220931,
222536,
113
],
[
222536,
226053,
114
],
[
226053,
227407,
115
],
[
227407,
228250,
116
],
[
228250,
229857,
117
],
[
229857,
231745,
118
],
[
231745,
232718,
119
],
[
232718,
234159,
120
],
[
234159,
234428,
121
],
[
234428,
236552,
122
]
]
} |
49943814672db812c41704b89e14c591f8e01305 | Metal Theft Scrutiny Commission
Final report
Councillors Brathwaite (Chair), Bigham, Kingsbury, Ogden and C. Whelan OBE
March 2013 Contents
Contents........................................................................................................................................... 2 Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 3 List of Recommendations .............................................................................................................. 4 Chair’s Foreword and Introduction ............................................................................................... 6 Legislative position and responsibilities ....................................................................................... 7 What we know about metal theft .................................................................................................. 10 The national picture .................................................................................................................. 10 London ....................................................................................................................................... 12 Lambeth ..................................................................................................................................... 13 What we know about the crime and the criminals ....................................................................... 16 Past, current and future activity .................................................................................................... 17 The council ............................................................................................................................... 17 The Police ............................................................................................................................... 25 Heritage assets ............................................................................................................................... 27 Infrastructure .................................................................................................................................. 29 Scrap Metal Dealers ..................................................................................................................... 30 Other local authorities .................................................................................................................. 31 Conclusions .................................................................................................................................... 35 Recommendations ......................................................................................................................... 37 Notes and thanks .......................................................................................................................... 40 Terms of reference and core questions ..................................................................................... 40 Methodology ............................................................................................................................. 40 Thanks ....................................................................................................................................... 41 References ....................................................................................................................................... 42
Appendix A – Letter to Public Bill Committee ............................................................................. 44 Appendix B – List of Scrap Metal Dealers registered with LB Lambeth .................................... 45 Appendix C – Lambeth Metal Theft Scrutiny Commission Partnership Action Plan .................. 46 Appendix D – LB Bexley Metal Theft awareness publicity materials ........................................ 52 Executive Summary
The report considers the scale and impact of metal theft in the London Borough of Lambeth. It examines the roles and responsibilities of the various council departments and identifies that the council does not currently have a clear understanding of the local scrap metal trade and is not making full use of its powers in relation to the trade. The commission identifies some good practice within the authority, particularly its commitment to the Alliance to Reduce Crime Against Heritage (ARCH) memorandum of understanding, and identifies a number of areas where the council and its partners could work better together to reduce metal theft.
The commission’s work was undertaken as the Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013 was being considered by Parliament. The Act is the first major reform to the scrap metal trade in 48 years. The commission welcomes the strengthened powers provided in the new legislation but does not consider it to be a panacea. Instead, the commission recommends that in the period prior to the new Act’s commencement, and beyond, the council and its partners implement a partnership action plan to tackle the issue in a holistic manner.
The report concludes that, whilst there is significant work that could be done within Lambeth, it is unlikely to have a significant impact unless similar work is replicated by the borough’s neighbours. The commission therefore recommends that the Cabinet Member works closely with the council’s partners and neighbours to develop and enforce a voluntary code of conduct for the scrap metal trade with a view to this being adopted pan-London once its sub-regional success can be demonstrated. List of Recommendations
(A) That Lambeth exercises its responsibilities as London’s first ARCH borough in recognising heritage crime, including metal theft, as a priority for the borough
(i) That as a signatory to the ARCH Memorandum of Understanding the council appoint a councillor to act as a Heritage Champion
(ii) That the council identify a single point of contact for metal theft of sufficient seniority to direct officers and take a strategic approach
(B) That the Cabinet Member for Public Protection, in partnership with the council, Lambeth Police and Operation Ferrous, lead on the development and implementation of a voluntary code of conduct for scrap metal dealers and motor salvage operators in the borough based on the best practice identified in this report
(C) That following development of a draft code of conduct the Cabinet Member for Public Protection, supported by the Chair of the Commission, lead on negotiations with Lambeth’s neighbouring boroughs to secure commitment to implementing the code across the sub-region, lay the foundations for future partnership work against metal theft and demonstrate to the rest of London that by working together metal theft can be driven out of our area
(D) That the Safer Lambeth Partnership, and relevant constituent partners, adopt with immediate effect the Lambeth Metal Theft Scrutiny Commission Partnership Action Plan (Appendix C) and implement actions accordingly
(i) That progress against the plan’s key milestones be reported back to Environment & Community Safety Scrutiny Sub-Committee
(E) That reassurance be sought from the Borough Commander that Lambeth Police are fully committed to tackling metal theft, resourcing it accordingly and that specific consideration be given to the following
(i) That confirmation be provided of who the single point of contact for metal theft is in Lambeth Police and assurance given that they are of senior rank (ii) That consideration be given to equipping all officers with portable ultra-violet lights to enable them to immediately identify property marking such as SmartWater
(F) That the Safer Lambeth Partnership make clear to residents what number they should call if they witness suspicious activity
(G) That partnership working with the full range of those operating in the policy area be improved specifically:
(i) Links between the council and the British Transport Police ‘fusion units’ to ensure information, particularly red-flags on specific scrap metal dealers, is shared
(ii) Links with the Environment Agency, British Telecom and neighbouring authorities to ensure an accurate picture of the number of dealers in and around the borough and to explore undertaking joint action
(iii) Links with British Telecom’s public relations team to identify opportunities for a shared communications campaign
(iv) Opportunities for joint training between the Police, council officers and partners so that each are aware of each others issues and powers
(v) Opportunities for the Police and council officers to undertake joint operations such as Operation Cubo and the Metal Theft Days of Action
(H) That Lambeth’s housing client team ensure an urgent audit is undertaken of the presence of dry-riser valves at the borough’s communal housing blocks and consider introducing warning signs and security at dry-riser locations (see timescales in action plan (Appendix C))
(I) That the council report back to Environment and Community Safety Scrutiny Sub-Committee on how it disposes of its own scrap metal to ensure that the value is returned to the council
(J) That all outstanding recommendations relating to council-owned or leased buildings from the council’s insurers be implemented immediately Chair’s Foreword and Introduction
My curiosity into metal theft arose following a spate of metal theft in Lambeth. Lambeth citizens have experienced disruptions to rail services, interruptions to telecommunications, theft of lead and copper from the roofs of churches, schools, private and council buildings, the theft of street signs, gully and manhole covers, and, most reprehensible, theft from war and grave memorials. We felt that criminals were endangering our heritage and councillors were not about to sit back and let that happen.
During the course of the commission members sought advice from the police, local scrap metal-dealers, local churches, British Telecom, Network Rail, community groups and individual residents. Whilst it was clear that agencies worked very hard to tackle metal theft in their own industries or areas, the commission was struck by the lack of a coordinated approach to metal theft. We have sought to address this recommending a more strategic approach to the prevention, investigation, enforcement and prosecution of metal theft. We want to ensure that the council, our neighbours and partners share expertise and resources and work smarter together. In addition the commission strongly believed that the community could play a pivotal role in the prevention and detection of metal theft. They are in effect the eyes and ears of the council and should be positively encouraged to look out for and report suspicious behaviour that might be related to metal theft.
While the commission welcomed the introduction of a licensing regime for scrap metal dealers in the Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013 we felt that reliance on the Act alone was not enough to deter metal theft in the borough. Robust policy changes and initiatives at a local level are needed to continue the recent decline in metal theft.
I would like to give my thanks to the members of the commission for their time and genuine commitment to the task of tackling metal theft in the borough. We are grateful to all those who gave their time to our work but are especially indebted to Nicole Terrieux and Kristian Aspinall in the Community Safety Team and PC Rob Harrison for their support in the development of the partnership action plan that will be the driving force for change. I would also like to thank Tom Barrett, Scrutiny Manager, for his invaluable input and for coordinating our approach to what we discovered was a very complex issue.
Cllr Jennifer Brathwaite (March 2013) Legislative position and responsibilities
1. The commission began its work by identifying the wide range of legislative powers that can already be applied to the issue of metal theft. The Scrap Metal Dealers Act 1964 is the main existing piece of legislation that regulates scrap metal dealers. It requires the council to issue licences to scrap metal dealers and, to maintain a register of persons operating in the borough as scrap metal dealers. Once registered with a local authority dealers must maintain records giving the following information:
- a description of the scrap metal and its weight;
- the date and time it was received;
- the full name and address of the person from whom it was received;
- the price payable for it or its value;
- if the scrap metal was delivered by vehicle, the registration number of that vehicle;
- the date the scrap metal was processed or dispatched;
- the full name and address of the person to whom the scrap metal was sold or exchanged and the price;
- if the scrap metal is disposed of otherwise than by sale or exchange, its value immediately before its disposal or processing.
2. In Lambeth dealers apply to register through completing a form, there is no fee payable and the council is unable to refuse registration nor can it impose any operating conditions.
3. The Scrap Metal Dealers Act 1964 was amended in early 2012 by the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders (LASPO) Act 2012. LASPO increased the maximum level of fines available for offences under the 1964 Act, made trading in cash illegal for non-itinerant dealers and introduced new powers for the police to enter premises. The provisions relating to cashless trading were enacted in December 2012.
4. As demonstrated in Table 1 there are a range of regulatory provisions that are applicable to the scrap metal trade including those related to waste transfer, transporting waste, burning cable insulation and requiring planning permission for scrap metal yards. The Environment Agency has national responsibility for regulation and enforcement of the ‘waste’ element including responsibility for permitting sites, licensing waste transportation and other hazardous waste.
______________________________________________________________________
1 LB Lambeth Public Realm Division (30 July 2012) systems. In addition to the regulatory framework there is also the criminal framework relating to handling stolen goods and motor salvage regulations. With regard to the Scrap Metal Dealers Act 1964 the general consensus was that the Act was well past its sell by date.
- **Scrap Metal Dealers Act 1964** (registration with local authority and requirements on SMDs re keeping records)
- **Theft Act 1968** (handling stolen goods)
- **Control of Pollution (Amendment) Act 1989** (makes it a criminal offence to transport waste without being a registered Waste Carrier with the Environment Agency)
- **Environmental Protection Act 1990** (Scrap Metal Dealers required to have a permit to operate from Environment Agency)
- **Town and Country Planning Act 1990** (requires Scrap Metal yards to have planning permission)
- **Clean Air Act 1993** (makes it a criminal offence to burn insulation from cables with a view to recovering metal- often an indication of an illegal scrap yard)
- **Vehicle Crimes Act 2001** (Motor Salvage Operators Regs 2002 requires motor salvage operators to register with the local authority and keep appropriate records)
- **Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012** (increase fines in SMD’64; ban on cashless trading (not itinerants); police powers of entry to Scrap Metal Dealers)
Table 1: Legislation applicable to the scrap metal trade or metal theft
5. As the commission began its work the Scrap Metal Dealers Bill, a Private Members Bill taken up by Richard Ottaway MP (Croydon South), began its journey through Parliament. As the commission finished its report the Bill completed its journey through parliament successfully and was awaiting enactment. The new legislation repeals and replaces the 1964 Act with one that will ‘empower local authorities with a more robust and enforceable licence regime for all those who deal and collect scrap metal’(^2). Key elements of the new legislation are as follows:
- No person can carry on business as a scrap metal dealer without a scrap metal licence
- The scrap metal licence is to be issued by the local authority
- The local authority must not issue or renew a license if it is not satisfied that the applicant is a suitable person to operate a scrap metal business
- A local authority will have the power to close down scrap metal yards operating without a license
(^2) House of Commons Library (2012) Where an applicant, licensee or manager has a criminal record relevant to metal dealing the local authority may impose conditions upon or vary the license so as to restrict trade
It will be an offence to receive metal from a person without first verifying that person’s identity
Dealers will be required to keep records for each sale and disposal for a period of three years
The extension of cashless trading to itinerant dealers: it will be an offence for a scrap metal dealer to pay for metal received other than by cheque or an electronic transfer
The introduction of a national public register of all Scrap Metal Dealers kept by the Environment Agency
The local authority has the power to revoke licences in certain circumstances
Local authorities and the police will have new powers to enter and inspect premises carrying on scrap metal business
The Act specifically widens the definition of Scrap Metal Dealers to include Motor Salvage Operators
6. As part of its work the commission submitted its views on the (then) draft legislation to the Public Bill Committee (House of Commons). This submission is set out in Appendix A to this report. Whilst the commission welcomes the main provisions of the soon-to-be Act councillors felt that the inability to impose local conditions on a licence was a significant omission. However, the commission’s lobbying on this point proved unsuccessful, save for the provision that the Act would be reviewed within five years to ensure that it had met its objectives. The commission felt that despite the numerous current and proposed legislations relating to with metal trade and theft, the council, as an enforcement agency, needed to be in a position to apply current and new legislative powers and responsibilities if Lambeth is to effectively tackle metal theft in the borough. The commission recognises that there is the issue of manpower and resources that needs to be addressed.
7. In the course of its work the commission was repeatedly reminded that successfully tackling metal theft required a response from beyond just those with legislative or regulatory powers. As such the commission considered
______________________________________________________________________
3 An itinerant dealer is a person who runs a scrap metal business other than from a site, he will collect waste material from door to door evidence and information from British Telecom, English Heritage, the Ecclesiastical Insurance Group, local churches, the Friends of West Norwood Cemetery, and a local scrap metal dealer. The commission also attended a conference organised by the Local Government Association that included speakers from the Energy Networks Association, the Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining, the Environment Agency, the British Metals Recycling Association (the trade association for scrap metal dealers) and a number of local authorities exhibiting best-practice in the area. Examples of work that each are undertaking are included in the Past, Current and Future Activity section of this report.
What we know about metal theft
The national picture
8. Estimates of the total social and economic cost of metal theft to the UK vary. The most recent studies estimate it at £220m per year (Home Office, 2011), between £220m-260m per year (Deloitte, 2011) and £777m per year (Association of Chief Police Officers, 2010)(^4). The LGA’s Metal Theft Toolkit records that in 2011, ‘15,000 tonnes of metal were stolen, of which 7,500 tonnes came from railways, statues and church roofs. The cost of the thefts to the railways alone amounted to £13 million, with many more millions lost as a result of delays to passengers’(^5). Nationally metal theft frequency is decreasing with both the Met and the British Transport Police (BTP) recording year-on-year decreases. Despite this 2011 was the worst year on record for the Ecclesiastical Insurance Group who recorded over 2,500 metal theft related claims during the period.
9. The commission was provided with evidence from both the Police and the Ecclesiastical Insurance Group that metal theft was closely linked to commodity prices (see Figure 1). Those prices were closely linked to global industrial growth, particularly by the two largest consumers of copper; China and the US(^6). The slow-down in the global economy resulted in falls in the price of copper during 2012(^7) and it was suggested to the commission that this may be one of the reasons for the decrease in metal theft during the last couple of years. Although the worldwide prices of scrap metal have recently fallen in
______________________________________________________________________
(^4) Home Office (2012) (^5) Local Government Association (2012), p5 (^6) Bloomberg (2013) (^7) Financial Times (2013) recent years, it is generally believed that prices will stay at elevated levels for some time. So the problem of metal theft is not going away.
Figure 1: Evidence to the Transport Select Committee
10. In terms of impact National Rail estimated that in 2010/11 3.8m passenger journeys were delayed or cancelled as a result of cable theft, causing 360,000 delay minutes and resulting in £16.5m compensation payments to train operators. Simon Davies, General Manager for Cable and Payphone Crime, British Telecom (BT) explained to the commission that metal theft was costing BT millions of pounds and taking up thousands of man hours every year. Single cuts to BT cable could result in thousands of people being without telephone or broadband services and in the most extreme cases result in complete community isolation (as had happened on the Isle of Skye). The commission noted that whilst being regular victims of metal theft Network Rail were also the largest contributor to the legitimate UK scrap metal industry. Local authorities were the third largest contributor.
11. In March 2012 the Environment Agency had permitted 831 scrap metal sites nationally, were aware of 317 active illegal sites and had stopped 190 illegal sites from operating. However, the commission learned that estimates by BT of the number of sites far exceeded those of both the Environment Agency and records kept by local authorities.
______________________________________________________________________
8 House of Commons Transport Committee (2010-12) 9 House of Commons Transport Committee (2012) 10 British Metals Recycling Association (2012) London
12. The Metropolitan Police’s pan London Operational Co-ordinator for Metal Theft Acting Inspector James Coomber, informed the commission that the national correlation between the number of crimes and commodity prices was repeated at a regional level. Looking at the London region as a whole it is the outer North East and South East boroughs that have the highest volume of metal theft crime. Croydon was known to have over 50 itinerant dealers registered and had experienced the highest number of incidents of metal theft in both 2011 and 2012. Acting Inspector Coomber informed the commission that there was also a clear correlation between the number of scrap metal dealers and the number of metal theft crimes in an area11.
13. In London the Metropolitan Police was reporting a 30% decline in metal theft incidents in 2012 and British Transport Police (BTP) had also recorded year-on-year declines (see Table 2 below). However both BTP and the Met cautioned that this was a result of both increased police activity and a reduction in commodity prices. The British Metals Recycling Association had predicted that the price of copper would increase from its slump in 2012 and in their evidence to the commission English Heritage warned that, despite a drop in metal theft last year, they were concerned that an increase in commodities prices or a decrease in police focus on the issue would spark a resurgence in metal theft.
| | Live | Non-live | |----------------|-------|----------| | | 2010/11 | 2011/12 | 2012 - Oct | 2010/11 | 2011/12 | 2012 - Oct | | London North | 102 | 142 | 184 | 172 | | London South | 114 | 64 | 33 | 203 | 165 | 60 | | London Underground | 22 | 42 | 99 | 64 | | Total | 238 | 248 | 486 | 401 |
Table 2: Number of crimes of live and redundant cable from BTP areas1213
11 This correlation has also been identified by researchers in America. See: Sidebottom (2012) 12 British Transport Police (2012a) and LB Lambeth Metal Theft Commission (October 2012) 13 It should be noted that the BTP London South area stretches from Kent to Devon as well as South London. Lambeth
14. The commission received detailed information from the Metropolitan Police relating to the prevalence and value of metal theft in Lambeth (see Table 3). In 2011 there were 168 incidents with metal worth £206k stolen and by September 2012 there had been 85 incidents with metal worth £122k stolen. Figures did not exist prior to 2011 as the Met had only recently begun tracking metal theft as a specific crime (previously it had been recorded under ‘theft’).
![Graph showing value and number of incidents of metal theft in Lambeth Jan 2011-Sept 2012]
Table 3: Value and Number of incidents of Metal Theft in Lambeth Jan 2011-Sept 2012
15. In comparison to Croydon, Southwark and Lewisham, Lambeth suffers less from metal theft. However, as was highlighted by Cllr Jack Hopkins, Lambeth’s Cabinet Member for Public Protection in his session with the commission, despite being low volume and generally small scale crimes the impact of metal theft was high (see case studies). The volume and type of thefts from authorities neighbouring Lambeth was also cause for concern to the commission. Southwark particularly had suffered a number of high profile thefts of public art (notably the Barbara Hepworth sculpture from Dulwich Park and a statue dedicated to Alfred Salter MP) whilst the spate of thefts in Richard Ottaway’s Croydon South constituency, including church roofs and war memorials, led to his introduction of the Scrap Metal Dealers Bill. Members of
______________________________________________________________________
14 Coomber (2012) 15 Southwark (2012) the commission were also pleased to learn that colleagues in Wandsworth were taking the issue seriously.
16. The commission was also conscious of the borough’s geography, that it was long and thin, and the major roads that ran through it, particularly the A23. This meant that it was easy for Lambeth itinerant dealers to travel outside of the borough and for non-Lambeth itinerant dealers to travel into, across and through the borough. This placed a greater emphasis on the importance of joint number plate recognition activities with the Police (see reference to Operation Cubo later in this report). Furthermore it made the commission aware that if metal is collected locally it is unlikely, due to our geography, to be processed locally thus making a joint approach with neighbouring authorities more important.
17. Given the link between crime volume and number of scrap metal dealers it is perhaps not surprising that Lambeth only has 12 scrap metal dealers registered in the borough. Of these four are physical scrap metal yards and the remaining eight are itinerant traders. This compares to fifty-plus itinerant traders in Croydon. Please review Appendix B for a list of the Scrap Metal Dealers operating in Lambeth.
18. However, the commission had cause to question the accuracy of the council’s register. The commission were provided with a restricted profile of scrap metal merchants and metal theft in the borough prepared by Lambeth Police in August 2011. That document included a list of 8 scrap metal dealers in or on the borders of Lambeth. None of those appearing on the Police’s list were registered on the Council’s list and vice versa. Furthermore, in his evidence to the commission, the Council’s Licensing Manager indicated that he had become aware of four un-registered scrap metal dealers as a result of health and safety audits undertaken by other parts of the Environmental Health Team. As a result, letters have been sent to each of the four unregistered dealers insisting that they register. However, the discrepancies between the information held suggests that there can be little certainty that either the Police or local authority have an authoritative record of Scrap Metal Dealers operating in Lambeth. It also suggests a lack of information sharing between the council and the Police.
19. The commission was also conscious of the relevance of motor salvage operators (MSOs) in relation to the scrap metal trade. The council is required to register MSOs and the powers available to it are stronger than those for registering scrap metal dealers (for example registration can be refused). However, there is only one registered operator in the borough. Given the apparent inaccuracies in the register of scrap metal dealers the commission thought it very likely that the register for MSOs was out of date and did not reflect the number of MSOs actually working in the borough.
20. The commission was provided with detailed information relating to the location of council-owned buildings that had been the subject of metal theft. Prior to 2007 there had been no insurance claims relating to metal theft but since then there had been 56, more than half of which related to either Libraries (16) or Schools (13). The total value of claims was close to £207,000. The
______________________________________________________________________
16 LB Lambeth (September 2012) 17 This figure does not reflect the damage caused to West Norwood Library and Nettlefold Halls. See separate Case Study commission noted that the council’s buildings, as is common practice for local authorities, are insured for catastrophe cover only with an excess of £500,000. As such the £207,000 figure was, or is to be, met entirely from council funds via a reserve set-aside for insurance claims. In addition to council-owned buildings the commission also received the following information from the Council’s Public Realm Division:
| Description | Total Cost (£) | 08-09 | 09-10 | 10-11 | 11-12 | Total | |------------------------------------------|----------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| | Time Plates (Parking/Disabled Bays) | 7,680 | 48 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 58 | | Metal Bollards / Cast Iron Bollards | 17,434 | 22 | 21 | 3 | 6 | 52 | | Signs (Parking and Direction) | 6,930 | 9 | 2 | 25 | 1 | 37 | | Posts (street name plates/Signs) | 9,499 | 16 | 7 | 7 | 1 | 31 | | Frames (Gully/Manhole cover) | 25,230 | 19 | 38 | 15 | 2 | 74 | | Street Name Plates | 29,912 | 43 | 60 | 5 | 16 | 123 | | Guard Rails | 676 | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | | **Total** | **97,361** | **161** | **128** | **65** | **26** | **379** |
Table 4: Theft of un-insured Public Realm assets
21. Whilst this too shows a declining trend the prevalence, total value and level of risk presented to the public from the loss of, for example, 80 gully or manhole covers was a shock to the commission. Members were pleased to note that a number of steps are being taken to reduce exposure to metal theft including fitting plastic parking signs, fixing road name plates out of reach and not replacing bollards as part of street de-cluttering. These steps may go some way in explaining the decline in theft of non-insured assets in the borough.
**What we know about the crime and the criminals**
22. Deputy Chief Constable Paul Crowther (British Transport Police and Association of Chief Police Officers lead on metal theft) characterised metal theft as similar to the illegal drugs market in reverse: small packages are stolen which are then bundled and exported. DCC Crowther highlighted that the risk-reward ratio was in favour of criminals; the average fine in 2010 was £369. The relatively small fines also acted as a disincentive to pursue prosecution.(^{18})
(^{18}) Crowther (2012) However, DCC Crowther felt that the removal of limits on fines for the most serious offences and introduction of cashless trading in the LASPO Act would go some way to addressing these problems. The commission agreed that the removal of an upper limit in financial penalties for the most serious offences represented a significant increase in the powers of the Magistrate court. We nevertheless felt that in practice, given the past level of fines, the removal of the upper limit on fines may not translate into magistrates imposing higher fines unless Lambeth together with the prosecuting authority, took a more robust approach to all cases of metal theft. For example, to persuade the magistrate to look beyond the value of the material stolen when deciding the level of fines, impact statements\\textsuperscript{19} by Lambeth officers should be submitted to highlight other consequences of metal theft in addition to the financial impact.
23. The majority of metal theft in Lambeth was opportunistic\\textsuperscript{20} with only a small percentage of crimes being large scale. This reflected two different types of criminality: the opportunist and the organised criminal. Of the 88 offences in Lambeth recorded in the six months prior to August 2011 39 related to copper theft and 32 to lead. The remaining types of metal were only in single figures (e.g. cabling, brass and steel).
**Past, current and future activity**
24. In February 2012 the LGA surveyed English and Welsh councils to ascertain if they had been affected by metal theft since April 2009. 70% of the authorities that responded had been affected with 18% reporting that they had suffered major consequences as a result. 39% of those surveyed had prosecuted thieves and/or scrap metal dealers. Mark Norris, Senior Adviser on policing, community safety and re-offending policy for the LGA, informed the commission that the broad conclusion of the survey was that many authorities were affected, but fewer had been doing anything about it at the time of the survey. The commission was therefore interested in what Lambeth had done, was doing and planned to do to address the issue.
**The council**
25. The two parts of the council with the greatest responsibility for tackling metal theft were the Public Realm Division, part of the Housing, Regeneration and
\\textsuperscript{19} See para 47 \\textsuperscript{20} Harrison (2011) Environment Department and the Community Safety Team, part of the Culture and Communities Division of the Adult and Community Services Department. The commission interviewed officers from both areas.
26. The Public Realm Division is responsible for a wide range of services relating to the maintenance and development of the public environment including: consumer protection (licensing and trading standards) street care and management. The Division is responsible for registering scrap metal dealers in accordance with the Scrap Metal Dealers Act 1964. In its sessions with the commission it was revealed that no enforcement activity (such as checking to ensure that the requirements of registration were being met (e.g. keeping records)) had been undertaken by the Division beyond fulfilling the legislative requirement to register dealers. Officers explained that this was because there was no funding for registration and therefore no capacity to undertake such work. In addition officers felt that there was insufficient call for a proactive approach and inadequate legislative powers should they do so. As a result the department did not have an established relationship with those Scrap Metal Dealers they had registered.
27. Public Realm officers were aware of the changes brought in by the LASPO Act and the proposals in the Scrap Metal Dealers Bill (soon-to-be Act) but did not propose to take any action until those pieces of legislation were in place. The impression given to the commission was that, once funding was attached to a licensing regime (as per the new Scrap Metal Dealers legislation), the department would be able to engage more proactively with local scrap metal dealers. Officers estimated that £4-500 was the likely indicative cost per licence issued and would be sufficient to fund a single enforcement visit per year. The frequency of enforcement visits was likely to be in line with the perceived risk of each dealer.
28. Officers indicated that there was occasional communication with the police relating to whether or not businesses were registered. However, the department did not share information (for example on itinerant traders) with neighbouring authorities and there appeared to be a lack of communication between the relevant council departments. For example there was no mechanism by which trading standards would be notified when the roof from West Norwood Library was stolen so that, for example, an alert could be sent to local dealers21. Members of the commission were also concerned at the
21 LB Lambeth (September 2012) apparent incompleteness of the council’s register and that it appeared that it was only by chance that the Licensing Manager had become aware of the additional four dealers that had undertaken health and safety audits within the same Division.
29. Overall the commission was disappointed that the Division were not taking a more proactive approach to the issue. In particular they felt that there had been a failure to create downward pressure on the local scrap metal industry through proper enforcement of the range of legislation available to them (particularly the Scrap Metal Dealers Act 1964 and environmental protection powers) and a lack of coordination with the likes of the Police or Environment Agency. This perception was also reflected in the Division’s approach to the new Scrap Metal Dealers legislation. The commission felt that officers were treating the Scrap Metal Dealers Bill as a panacea when in fact tackling the problem was a far wider issue requiring a range of approaches. Given the link between levels of theft and the number of dealers it was quite clear to the commission that one of the most important first steps the Division needed to take was getting a clear idea of the number of scrap metal dealers in the borough and establishing an ongoing relationship with them.
30. Some of the concerns that the commission had regarding closer working between council departments were addressed in discussion with Adrian Smith, Divisional Director, Culture and Communities and the officer with overall responsibility for the council’s Community Safety Team. Mr Smith indicated that the council was moving away from separate functions towards a more integrated model of enforcement under the banner of ‘community safeguarding’. The commission were informed that the model would go some way to getting the multiple enforcement specialisms (community safety, environmental crime, licensing, noise, trading standards, foods, health and safety) sharing resources and intelligence and working better together.
31. The Community Safety Team informed the commission that metal theft had not been identified as a priority issue in the Safer Lambeth Partnership’s annual strategic assessment. Despite this, in partnership with Lambeth Police and in discussion with the commission the Team drafted a multi-agency action plan on
______________________________________________________________________
22 The Safer Lambeth Partnership is Lambeth’s statutory community safety partnership, responsible for delivering Lambeth’s Community Safety Strategy. It is chaired jointly by the Borough Commander, Lambeth Police and LB Lambeth’s Chief Executive. Representatives of the local NHS, Probation, Prison and Fire services sit on the SLP along with representatives of the Community Police Consultative Group and a range of voluntary and community organisations. metal theft. The commission was grateful to the Community Safety Team for pausing the development of the action plan whilst the commission completed its work. This enabled the commission to take ownership of the action plan, ensure its findings are fully reflected within it and is an excellent example of collaborative working between officers and a Scrutiny Commission. The plan is appended at Appendix C.
**Recommendation:** That the Safer Lambeth Partnership, and relevant constituent partners, adopt with immediate effect the Lambeth Metal Theft Scrutiny Commission Partnership Action Plan (Appendix C) and implement actions accordingly (P1/T3)
32. The plan focuses on four areas: Intelligence; Protection and prevention; Enforcement action; Communications and addresses the operational concerns that arose in the course of the commission’s work. These include identifying and protecting at-risk assets (council, partner and community); creating a master list of scrap metal dealers and establishing a relationship with dealers; establishing an ongoing enforcement regime and steps to build awareness of metal theft. The commission was impressed at the commitment shown to tackling the issue by the officers (Police and Lambeth) that engaged the commission on the plan’s development.
33. However, some concerns remained. It appeared that commitment to the issue was driven by the efforts of a few, relatively junior police and council officers. Whilst this was to be welcomed the commission felt that this left maintaining focus on the issue vulnerable to key staff leaving. Indeed, during the commission’s work both of the lead Police officers, one a PC and the other a Sergeant were moved to other duties. Furthermore question marks remained regarding levels of commitment to full implementation of the action plan by the relevant parts of the partnership and therefore delivery of the outcomes identified. The commission was keen to see the momentum that had been established by the development of the action plan maintained within the partnership. Key to this appeared to be establishing single points of contact within both Lambeth Police and the council with a commitment to the issue, the seniority to direct officers and ability take a strategic approach to the issue. Recommendation: That the council identify a single point of contact for metal theft of sufficient seniority to direct officers and take a strategic approach
Recommendation: Confirmation be provided of who the single point of contact for metal theft is in Lambeth Police and assurance given that they are of senior rank
34. In its session with the Community Safety Team and Cabinet Member for Public Protection the commission learned of a number of welcome steps that were being taken in relation to protecting Lambeth’s 2500 heritage assets (e.g. churches, public art, war memorials). As the commission’s work progressed Lambeth became the first London Borough (shortly followed by our neighbours in Wandsworth) to join English Heritage’s Alliance to Reduce Crime Against
Alliance to Reduce Crime Against Heritage – memorandum of understanding
As a signatory to the ARCH memorandum of understanding (MoU) Lambeth has committed to the following responsibilities:
- An annual strategic assessment for heritage crime which informs an action plan for the parties (the council, English Heritage, ACPO and the CPS) to the MoU to follow.
- Development plans take account of the historic environment.
- Exercise functions as a local planning authority in relation to listed buildings, conservation areas and scheduled monuments.
- Strategies to tackle crime and disorder including anti-social behaviour to include the historic environment and associated heritage assets.
- Assist MoU partners where practicable and wherever resources and powers allow, in the prevention, investigation, enforcement and prosecution of heritage crime.
- work closely to develop and adopt good practice in the sharing of personal and non personal information with other signatories.
- recognise that the sharing of knowledge and working practices is beneficial in tackling heritage crime.
- Assist and advise in any campaigns of prevention and, where expertise is needed and resources allow, in the investigation and prosecution of any crimes. Heritage (ARCH). ARCH is a voluntary national network of stakeholders with an interest in preventing crime that causes damage to or interferes with the enjoyment of heritage assets in England. In addition to ARCH membership Lambeth also became the first London Borough to sign the ARCH memorandum of understanding for enforcement agencies (see box). The commission welcomed Lambeth’s membership of ARCH, particularly the commitment that this gave to prioritising heritage crime, including metal theft, and was eager for the council to demonstrate how it was exercising its responsibilities as a member. This was especially the case in relation to war memorials, the commission was conscious that the 100 year anniversary of the beginning of the Great War was approaching in 2014, and West Norwood Cemetery which had been subjected to a number of thefts and provided evidence to the commission. The commission felt that identifying a Heritage Champion from members of the Council would help give the issue sufficient weight and also that ARCH membership appeared to represent an excellent opportunity to work together with the council’s neighbours and fellow-signatory in Wandsworth.
**Recommendation:** That Lambeth exercises its responsibilities as London’s first ARCH borough in recognising heritage crime, including metal theft, as a priority for the borough (P1/T3)
(i) That as a signatory to the ARCH Memorandum of Understanding the council appoint a councillor to act as a Heritage Champion (P1/T3)
35. Alongside ARCH membership the Cabinet Member for Public Protection informed the commission that he was establishing an *Urban Heritage Watch* (UHW). The purpose of UHW was to provide a mechanism by which members of the community could help protect the borough’s heritage assets by taking an active role in monitoring sites, reporting suspicious activity and sharing intelligence. As well as ‘friends groups’ the scheme would also be targeted at those who run businesses overlooking heritage sites, for example shopkeepers. Such an approach was welcomed by the Commission, not least because it reflected some of the good practice that had been identified at St Peter's Church (see case study) and by both the Ecclesiastical Insurance Group and English Heritage who emphasised the importance of intelligence about and subsequent risk-rating of assets.
36. It was inconceivable to the commission that many of the metal thefts that took place in the borough had not been witnessed by members of the public. However, as councillors learned, it was not uncommon for thieves to disguise themselves as legitimate workers (for example dressed in BT overalls/using BT vans). The commission therefore questioned whether the council and/or Police should engage in a broader awareness-raising campaign, similar to that which had been undertaken in Bexley (see Appendix D). Given the existing level of communications ‘noise’ arising from other borough-wide campaigns the Cabinet Member and Community Safety Officers felt that such a campaign risked being expensive, ineffective and not in proportion to the scale of the issue. Rather they preferred taking a targeted approach as proposed in the Urban Heritage Watch scheme and working with the likes of BT and Safer Neighbourhood Teams to raise awareness of legitimate works that were taking place. Despite this, members of the commission felt that some improvement needed to be made to make clear to the public what they should do if they witness some suspicious activity as it was clear that many considered calling 999 an over-reaction.
**Recommendation:** That the Safer Lambeth Partnership make clear to residents what number they should call if they witness suspicious activity
37. Although Public Realm and Community Safety Team are the parts of the council with the greatest role in relation to metal theft the commission also discussed the topic with the Risk and Insurance Team (Finance & Resources Department) and received a brief paper from the Valuations and Asset Management Services Division (Housing, Regeneration and Environment Department). The latter note identified reactive work being undertaken to a number of heritage sites in the borough after they had suffered from metal theft or vandalism: West Norwood Library, Nettlefold Hall and West Norwood Crematorium Chapel, Brockwell Hall and Streatham Library.
38. Information provided by the Risk and Insurance Team highlighted that metal theft accounted for just 1.3% of total claims made by the council between 2007-12. For this reason management activity to date had been focussed on other Case study: West Norwood Library and the Nettlefold Halls
Thefts of metal from West Norwood Library and the Nettlefold Halls appear to date back to at least 2008. In September 2010 the council’s insurers, Zurich Municipal, conducted a risk management report of the site. This highlighted the vulnerability of the building’s copper roof and recommended that further protection was put in place to restrict access as a priority and within three months. No such measures were put in place. Between 12 March and 14 June 2011 further thefts of the copper roof at West Norwood Library and the Nettlefold Halls were recorded on 8 separate occasions and on 6 June 2011 the Library and Halls were closed due to extensive flooding and water damage. The council’s Risk and Insurance Team highlighted that these thefts exacerbated existing problems of water ingress into a building which was already in need of repairs and maintenance works. As such the costs incurred as a result of the water ingress have only been partially met through the insurance claims. The Library and Halls were not re-opened and at the time of writing redevelopment plans were being put in place for the site. In the meantime the Library re-located temporarily to the Lambeth Resource Centre, before subsequently moving to the Old Library site due to low usage of the LRC.
No full appraisal of the financial cost to the council of the closure and re-location of the library has been undertaken. However, the commission was able to identify the following direct costs:
| Cost | Value (£) | |-----------------------------|-----------| | 2008-11 Insurance claims | -29,000 | | 2011 Making safe | -10,000 | | Temporary Roof | -187,000 | | Loss of income (p/a) | -40,000 | | Total | -266,000 |
Whilst it is clear that the cost to the council of these incidences of metal theft are well in excess of £¼m the commission was also aware of the significant impact that closure of the Library and Halls had on the community. In addition to the various events hosted by the library in 2010-11 the Nettlefold hosted 682 events and activities open to the public and 60 private events.
Groups affected by the continued loss of this community resource include older people’s groups, dance schools, fitness classes (including GP referral classes), student shows, homework classes, music shows, mental health groups and the local MP’s advice sessions. The commission was informed that many of the groups that used the auditorium/theatre space in particular have moved out of the local area. claim areas where the cost to the council is significantly higher\\textsuperscript{23}. However, there was evidence that where management activity had been undertaken the reports and recommendations of the Risk and Insurance Team were not necessarily adhered to. This was most notably the case with West Norwood Library and Nettlefold Hall where thefts of its copper roof has compounded a previous lack of investment in repairs and maintenance resulting in the continued closure of the site (see case study). The immeasurable cost to the community of loss of the resource and the (unmeasured) total financial costs incurred by the council as a result of these thefts far outstrip both the scrap value of the copper stolen and the costs of the preventative action that was recommended. Further investigation of the council’s property risk management surveys revealed that there were 24 outstanding priority 1 recommendations (requiring action within between 1-3 months) from the council’s insurers, some of which dated back to June 2009. It was not acceptable to the commission that the reports and recommendations of the council’s insurers are not implemented as failure to do so exposes the council to unnecessary risk, potential cost and in the worst-case scenario loss of services to communities.
\\begin{center} \\textbf{Recommendation:} That all outstanding recommendations relating to council-owned or leased buildings from the council’s insurers be implemented immediately. \\end{center}
\\textbf{The Police}
39. Across the UK the commission learned of considerable work being undertaken by the Police. Particularly notable was the success of Operation Tornado, a voluntary scheme developed in the North East by a partnership of the British Metals Recycling Association (BMRA), the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), British Transport Police (BTP), the Home Office, and Northumbria, Durham and Cleveland Police. The scheme requires anyone selling scrap metal to participating dealers to provide photographic proof of identity and abstention from cash payments as two of a number of measures used to restrict the sale and movement of stolen metal. In the pilot areas Durham reported a 55% reduction in offences, Cleveland 55%, Northumbria around 40%, and BTP a 60% reduction\\textsuperscript{24}. The commission was informed that
\\textsuperscript{23} LB Lambeth Risk and Insurance Team (30 July 2012) \\textsuperscript{24} British Transport Police (2012b) Operation Tornado was due to be rolled out across the Met area but at the time of writing this had not taken place. The majority of the steps taken voluntarily under Tornado will become law once the Scrap Metal Dealer Bill 2013 is enacted but it was of particular note that Tornado’s success took place without legislation. This demonstrated to the commission that it was not necessary to wait until new legislation was in place to take effective steps to restrict the trade in illegal scrap metal. Accordingly the commission puts its full weight behind proposals to roll Tornado, or a similar voluntary code out across London as soon as possible. At the very least the commission felt that such a move would enable the Police and local authority to identify higher-risk dealers.
**Recommendation:** That the Cabinet Member for Public Protection, in partnership with the council, Lambeth Police and Operation Ferrous, lead on the development and implementation of a voluntary code of conduct for scrap metal dealers and motor salvage operators in the borough based on the best practice identified in this report.
40. The commission was informed in October 2012 that in the previous twelve months there had been only two thefts on the railways in Lambeth, one in Tulse Hill and the other in Waterloo. In both cases members were pleased to hear that there had been arrests. In the same session members were informed that BTP, English Heritage, HM Revenue and Custom, BT and National Rail analysts worked together on ‘fusion’ units. They used red, amber, green (RAG) ratings to identify problematic scrap metal dealers and then worked to convert those rated as red to amber or green. However, where a red-risk dealer was identified the relevant local authority would not necessarily be notified. This felt to the commission like a further area where closer information-sharing could result in more effective partnership work, reduce duplication and create further downward pressure on the illegal trade.
41. The commission was surprised to learn that until mid-2012 the Crime Record Information System (CRIS) had not included specific classifications for metal theft; previously it had just been classified as theft. This had now changed with the introduction of two classifications; ‘metal theft infrastructure’ and ‘metal theft non-infrastructure’. This increase in the profile of metal theft within the Police was also reflected in the Met’s decision to take a more coordinated approach to the issue in early 2012 through the introduction of Operation Ferrous, led by Acting Inspector James Coomber. Acting Inspector Coomber had previously worked in Bexley where he had led a number of Police and partnership teams that had been acknowledged as best practice in tackling metal theft. He outlined a number of steps that the Met was taking. These included working with heritage partners such as the Church and English Heritage, deploying officers in London-wide ‘days of action’ every quarter (surprise visits to scrap metal dealers and motor salvage yards) and compiling a web-based database (MARS) of scrap metal dealers.
42. As well as the ‘days of action’ A/I Coomber informed the commission of other Met-wide operations that the police undertook which closed the net on metal thieves. This included Operation Cubo, which utilises automatic number-plate recognition (ANPR) technology to identify vehicles used by criminals or uninsured drivers. The commission felt that both Cubo and Tornado represented a considerable opportunity for council officers (particularly those with relevant regulatory responsibilities) to undertake joint work with the local Police to bring the full weight of each organisation’s regulatory and legal powers down on the illegal metal trade as well as an opportunity to establish a relationship with local scrap metal dealers. The commission noted that such joint operations were common in other local authority areas, including across the border in Wandsworth.
**Heritage assets**
43. The commission held information-gathering sessions with English Heritage, the Ecclesiastical Insurance Group (EIG), the Diocese of Southwark and those responsible for specific heritage assets in the borough (Friends of West Norwood Cemetery and St Peter’s Church (see case study)). An experience repeated by a number of those responsible for heritage assets to the commission was that the response by the police had been slow and that they had not appeared particularly interested in the crime. Whilst there were positive reports of efforts by the local Crime Prevention Design Advisor, PC Rob Harrison, there appeared to be a disconnect between his understanding of the issues with those in the rest of the force.
44. In contrast, St Peter’s Church indicated that the advice and support received from EIG had been excellent. EIG, in their session with the commission, indicated that the theft of metal from churches had been a significant problem since 2007 resulting in the group imposing restrictions on their cover where churches were not taking a proactive approach to protecting themselves. It did not escape the commission’s attention that St Luke’s Church, the location for one of the commission’s information-gathering sessions, had been the victim of metal theft when scaffolding had been erected. The Group’s consultants and surveyors provide advice to churches and specific guidance is available on their website. Since 2008 the Group has been distributing free SmartWater kits to their policy-holders and they were confident that, when used with the relevant warning signs, SmartWater acted as a considerable deterrent. By November 2012 over 18,000 churches nationwide had registered with SmartWater and EIG had reported a 60% drop in lead thefts during the previous 12 months.(^{25})
45. However, EIG were aware that SmartWater whilst a deterrent would not prevent all metal theft. However the ‘deterrent factor’ could be enhanced by wider usage of ultra violet lights (under which SmartWater shows up) by both the Police and scrap-metal dealers.
46. EIG had also recently launched a hands-off our church roofs campaign which provided further advice to churches and encouraged them to consider installing a suitable roof alarm. This was alongside a targeted approach to funding RDAS alarm systems for certain churches. The £3-6,000 cost of rolling out such systems to the 14,000 churches in England was prohibitive to EIG however, as can be seen in the St Peter’s case study, one Lambeth Church had received seed funding for an alarm from EIG and this had brought theft at the site to a halt. EIG informed the commission that funding for alarm systems was provided on a targeted basis taking into account claims history, local knowledge and consultation with relevant personnel within each diocese. The free alarm-surveys were being provided as part of the ‘hands off’ campaign. The commission was also pleased that EIG’s advice to churches included guidance on establishing churchwatch-type arrangements as had been so successful at St Peter’s and was proposed by the council’s Urban Heritage Watch scheme.
47. The commission also welcomed the considerable work that had been undertaken by English Heritage in relation to metal theft under the banner of its ARCH scheme. When metal theft had first become a problem it was felt that English Heritage’s insistence that metal, where stolen from a heritage building,
(^{25}) Giles, Lloyd and Playfor (September 2012) be replaced with like-for-like, was exacerbating the problem\\textsuperscript{26}. However, it became clear that the organisation was now taking a more pragmatic and proactive approach to the problem exemplified in a series of publications\\textsuperscript{27} providing guidance on heritage crime prevention, interventions (including prosecution), preventing and dealing with theft of metal from churches and the production of heritage crime impact statements. The focus on these topics was particularly welcomed as the commission learnt from the Diocese that in the past the Police and magistrates had taken a long time to respond and appeared uninterested\\textsuperscript{28}. Guidance on the production of impact statements was felt to be particularly helpful in assisting those who had been the victim of metal theft to articulate the impact of the crime to the relevant enforcement agencies.
48. In its session with Mark Harrison, National Policing and Crime Advisor at English Heritage, the commission also welcomed suggestions for the development of community-based responsibility for and awareness of heritage assets, particularly amongst young people. This was again felt to be an area where the council could act as a platform, facilitating the involvement of, for example, local youth groups, Girl Guide or Scout Troops and acknowledging the role that this would play in the development of a ‘sense of place’\\textsuperscript{29}. This was similar to the suggestion made by Richard Moore, Chair of Thurlow Park Safer Neighbourhood Panel, who suggested to the commission that a Lambeth Heritage photo competition may encourage people to take more responsibility for heritage assets\\textsuperscript{30}. The commission felt that such approaches would prove a welcome, and inexpensive, addition to the council’s Urban Heritage Watch proposals.
\\textit{Infrastructure}
49. Unsurprisingly, given their access to the necessary funds, the commission found the use of alarms to be widespread by Network Rail and British Telecom. Simon Davies, General Manager for Cable and Payphone Crime (BT) highlighted the RABIT (Rapid Assessment BT Incident Tracker) alarm system which enabled BT to identify immediately where unauthorised cuts
\\textsuperscript{26} LB Lambeth (September 2012) \\textsuperscript{27} See \\url{http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/professional/advice/advice-by-topic/heritage-crime} \\textsuperscript{28} Ibid. \\textsuperscript{29} Bradley et al. (2011) \\textsuperscript{30} LB Lambeth (September 2012) were made to its cable and send information to police control centres immediately. Similarly Network Rail had successfully used tremor alarms to prevent theft. However, despite the success of alarms and other preventative measures (such as smartwater and physically locking down infrastructure) protecting the network represented only one part of British Telecom’s three-pronged approach. The remaining steps were: choking the market, through visiting scrap metal dealers and ensuring that there is no easy route for the disposal of BT cable through non-authorised dealers; and engagement with government, the trade, the police (sharing intelligence) and communities (for example working with crimestoppers and undertaking mailshots of areas where there has been metal theft).
50. Mr Davies informed the commission that one of the difficulties that they had experienced nationally was a lack of local enforcement activity. The commission welcomed Mr Davies’ offer to work more closely with the council and felt that in terms of communications, intelligence-sharing and joint operations (such as joint visits to scrap metal dealers) there was considerable scope for such work.
51. Network Rail provided the commission with information on their four-fold strategy to tackle metal theft which had seen delay minutes reduce by 51% since 2011. This focussed on:
- Engineering - the use of CCTV, alarms and making access more difficult
- Education – increasing awareness including lobbying activity on the Scrap Metal Dealers Bill
- Enforcement – working closely with British Transport Police, visiting dealers and sharing intelligence via the fusion intelligence unit
- Enablement – the operational response to incidents and use of security patrols in key areas
**Recommendation:** That partnership working with the full range of those operating in the policy area be improved
**Scrap Metal Dealers**
52. Whilst the commission was unable to meet formally with representatives of the British Metal Recycling Association (BMRA) members acknowledged that legitimate scrap metal dealers were often the victims of crime. This view was reinforced when the commission undertook a visit to, and met with the owner of, Glynn’s Metal Recycling in Loughborough Junction, Lambeth. Security at the site was considerable and included ANPR technology. Paul Glynn, who owns and manages the site came to the commission’s attention when he purchased, in order to return, a memorial plaque that had gone missing from a church in Camberwell some 30 years previously. Mr Glynn informed the commission that there was little benefit in trading in stolen materials as the risks outweighed the limited profit available. It became clear to the commission that the borough’s registered scrap metal dealers operated at the front-line of metal theft with thieves regularly attending the premises to try to dispose of stolen metal and being abusive and making threats if such attempts were refused. This insight was particularly meaningful for the commission as it emphasised the opportunity which existed to establish close working relationships between local scrap metal dealers and the relevant authorities to tackle the trade in stolen metal. Whilst Mr Glynn indicated that he had regular visits from, and a strong relationship with, the local police he had never had any contact with the local authority or other regulatory authorities.
53. In his presentation at the LGA conference, Ian Hetherington, Chief Executive of the BMRA indicated that the majority of SMDs in the UK were registered with the BMRA but there was a ‘long tail’ of small dealers who were not. Whilst membership of the BMRA is not necessarily an indication of legitimacy this point was used to emphasise that the Scrap Metal Dealers Bill 2013 would not work unless it was effectively enforced by all the relevant powers. Mr Glynn made a similar point when he emphasised to the commission that the presence of unscrupulous dealers, and their ability to continue operating, made business harder for registered dealers as those who were not registered were able to pay more than the going rate for metals because they did not have the same overheads.
Other local authorities
54. The commission found the Local Government Association’s Metal Theft Toolkit a helpful document setting out some of the approaches to metal theft that had been undertaken at other local authorities. This included voluntary codes of practice for scrap metal dealers developed by Birmingham City Council (see appendix 1), Kirklees, Forest of Dean and the British Metals Recycling
______________________________________________________________________
31 South London Press (2012) 32 Local Government Association (2012) Case study: Bexley
In December 2011 a multi-agency Metal Theft Task Force was formed and comprised; police, two BT Metal Theft Investigators and an Environmental Crime Officer from London Borough of Bexley. This core team was assisted by Bexley Trading Standards and Neighbourhood Services Team, Registered Social Landlords, Smartwater, Environment Agency, DWP Benefit Fraud Team, HMRC Criminal Taxes Unit and BTP Metal Theft and Cable Crime Team.
In the three months the team made 24 arrests, 12 proactive operations were carried out, 25 search warrants were executed, 22 scrap metal dealers visited, 11 vehicles seized and 17 people reported for other offences.
During the period 1st October 2010 and 30th September 2011 Bexley borough suffered 634 recorded metal theft crimes, which included a series of thefts of dry riser valves from 18 tower blocks. At one stage 85 valves were stolen and 16 of the 18 blocks had no valves left at all. The loss of one valve rendered the whole system inoperable and no water could be directed to any level of the block in the event of a fire. The cost for repairs and replacements was around £75,000.
In addition drain cover thefts totalled 180 during 2010 and 2011, costing over £52,000 to replace. Local people were outraged by the theft of memorial plaques from the Bexleyheath and Sidcup war memorials. The repair bill for copper water tanks, piping and intercom wiring systems that were stolen from newly refurbished flats in Thamesmead was over £250,000.
British Telecom also suffered frequently, with one estate in Erith having underground cable stolen three times. On each occasion over 200 telephone lines were knocked out for a period of three days.
The team carried out a series of operations on roads leading to scrap metal yards to disrupt the activities of thieves and those involved in the illegal transport of waste.
Joint inspections of scrap metal yards were conducted to search for stolen property and to check they were complying with legislation. Owners were encouraged to adopt a code of practice and keep records of all transactions and the team ensured the yards displayed signage to demonstrate partnership working and to deter thieves.
Other tactics included property marking, seizure of uninsured and unlicensed vehicles, ‘theft alerts’ to yard owners and crime prevention advice. Social landlords were advised when stolen property was recovered and offenders were placed under threat of eviction. Tax evasion and benefit fraud were referred to the Department of Work and Pensions fraud team and Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs criminal taxes unit.
All this work was supported by a media campaign that highlighted the safety risks and also the immoral act of stealing bronze plaques from war memorials. Association. In most cases these codes went further than either Operation Tornado or the soon-to-be enacted Scrap Metal Dealers Act 2013. However, the commission welcomed the local emphasis that such a code provided and the initiative that they demonstrated these authorities were taking.
55. In London, Bexley (see case study and publicity materials at Appendix D) was identified as demonstrating best practice. The commission was particularly alarmed at the theft of dry-riser valves and wished to seek assurance that a similar pattern of theft had not taken place in Lambeth. Enfield and Hillingdon were cited as having taken proactive steps in relation to registering itinerant dealers. In Enfield all individuals wishing to register as itinerant dealers are required to attend the council’s offices by appointment to demonstrate how they will maintain the required records and demonstrate possession of the relevant waste carriers licence. Furthermore representatives of the Police and Department for Work and Pensions attend to ensure that the applicant is not otherwise of interest to them or claiming relevant benefits. In Hillingdon all applications for registration are passed to the local Police who then pay a visit to the applicant in person. Both approaches were reported as having been effective. The commission also noted that anti-social behaviour powers had been used in Hillingdon to curb the activities of one particular individual known to the Police.
**Recommendation:** That the Cabinet Member for Public Protection, in partnership with the council, Lambeth Police and Operation Ferrous, lead on the development and implementation of a voluntary code of conduct for scrap metal dealers and motor salvage operators in the borough based on the best practice identified in this report.
**Recommendation:** That Lambeth’s housing client team ensure an urgent audit is undertaken of the presence of dry-riser valves at the borough’s communal housing blocks and consider introducing warning signs and security at dry-riser locations (see timescales in action plan (Appendix C)).
______________________________________________________________________
33 Metropolitan Police (2013) 56. The commission also welcomed the engagement of Lambeth’s neighbours in tackling metal theft. Colleagues in Wandsworth had undertaken successful joint work with the Police and UK Border Agency as part of Operation Ferrous\\textsuperscript{34} and were also known to be engaged with English Heritage’s ARCH programme. In Southwark considerable attention had been paid to the issue following the high profile thefts of public art and Richard Ottaway MP’s support for the Scrap Metal Dealers Bill 2013 demonstrated commitment to the issue south of the borough.
\\textsuperscript{34} Metropolitan Police (2012) Conclusions
57. In drawing together its findings the commission was conscious that reported figures for metal theft were declining both nationally and in London and that metal theft was not a policing and crime priority for the borough. However, members did not consider this a reason for not taking any action. The close link between metal theft and commodity prices emphasised the fragility of the declining trend and the number of scrap metal dealers in and around Lambeth, coupled with the correlation between dealer numbers and crime volume leads, remains high. This, along with the personal and financial impact of the crime leads the commission to conclude that there remains a need for action to be taken.
58. In terms of the council’s approach the commission found a tale of two divisions. In particular the commission concluded that there was considerable scope for the council to take a more proactive approach towards its relationship with the local scrap metal trade both through rigorous enforcement of the existing range of legislation and the promotion of a voluntary code of practice. Pinning the council’s activity solely on implementation of the Scrap Metal Dealer Act 2013 was not, in the commission’s view, the right approach to be taking. The partnership action plan was a welcome step towards this more proactive approach but it was not clear to the commission how rigorously the plan would be implemented nor how the move towards a ‘community safeguarding’ model would ensure this implementation.
59. In line with the action plan the commission welcomed the steps that the council had begun to take in working with the Police and English Heritage. However, it was clear from the information received that the opportunities for closer partnership working were wider than these two organisations. The commission received offers for closer working from British Telecom (communications, intelligence, joint visits) and the Diocese of Southwark and indications that they would welcome closer working from those responsible for local church and heritage assets. This bodes particularly well for the Urban Heritage Watch proposal (which the commission fully supports) and presents opportunities for the cost-burden on the local authority to be reduced.
60. The commission was clear that over-and-above the implementation of the action plan there were no legal barriers to the council putting into place a voluntary code of conduct straight away, whether by itself or in partnership with the Police or others.
61. However, what also became clear was that, due to the geography of London, any action taken within Lambeth would have limited impact if it was not replicated by our neighbours. A coordinated approach is required whereby downward pressure on the trade is exerted across the sub-region and best practice and resources shared to drive the illegal scrap metal trade out of London. This is no small task, but a Met-wide approach and pockets of best-practice already exist. It is the commission’s view that these pockets just need to be joined up and that Lambeth and its neighbours are well-placed, and have been victims long-enough, to begin this work and demonstrate its value to the rest of London. Recommendations
(A) That Lambeth exercises its responsibilities as London’s first ARCH borough in recognising heritage crime, including metal theft, as a priority for the borough (P1/T3)
(i) That as a signatory to the ARCH Memorandum of Understanding the council appoint a councillor to act as a Heritage Champion (P1/T3)
(ii) That the council identify a single point of contact for metal theft of sufficient seniority to direct officers and take a strategic approach
(B) That the Cabinet Member for Public Protection, in partnership with the council, Lambeth Police and Operation Ferrous, lead on the development and implementation of a voluntary code of conduct for scrap metal dealers and motor salvage operators in the borough based on the best practice identified in this report (P1/T3)
(C) That following development of a draft code of conduct the Cabinet Member for Public Protection, supported by the Chair of the Commission, lead on negotiations with Lambeth’s neighbouring boroughs to secure commitment to implementing the code across the sub-region, lay the foundations for future partnership work against metal theft and demonstrate to the rest of London that by working together metal theft can be driven out of our area (P1/T6)
(D) That the Safer Lambeth Partnership, and relevant constituent partners, adopt with immediate effect the Lambeth Metal Theft Scrutiny Commission Partnership Action Plan (Appendix C) and implement actions accordingly (P1/T1)
(i) That progress against the plan’s key milestones be reported back to Environment & Community Safety Scrutiny Sub-Committee
(E) That reassurance be sought from the Borough Commander that Lambeth Police are fully committed to tackling metal theft, resourcing it accordingly and that specific consideration be given to the following
(i) That confirmation be provided of who the single point of contact for metal theft is in Lambeth Police and assurance given that they are of senior rank (P1/T3) (ii) That consideration be given to equipping all officers with portable ultra-violet lights to enable them to immediately identify property marking such as SmartWater (P2/T6)
(F) That the Safer Lambeth Partnership make clear to residents what number they should call if they witness suspicious activity (P2/T6)
(G) That partnership working with the full range of those operating in the policy area be improved specifically (P1/T6):
(i) Links between the council and the British Transport Police ‘fusion units’ to ensure information, particularly red-flags on specific scrap metal dealers, is shared
(ii) Links with the Environment Agency, British Telecom and neighbouring authorities to ensure an accurate picture of the number of dealers in and around the borough and to explore undertaking joint action
(iii) Links with British Telecom’s public relations team to identify opportunities for a shared communications campaign
(iv) Opportunities for joint training between the Police, council officers and partners so that each are aware of each others issues and powers (P1/T9)
(v) Opportunities for the Police and council officers to undertake joint operations such as Operation Cubo and the Metal Theft Days of Action
(H) That Lambeth’s housing client team ensure an urgent audit is undertaken of the presence of dry-riser valves at the borough’s communal housing blocks and consider introducing warning signs and security at dry-riser locations (see timescales in action plan (Appendix C))
(I) That the council report back to Environment and Community Safety Scrutiny Sub-Committee on how it disposes of its own scrap metal to ensure that the value is returned to the council (P3/T6)
(J) That all outstanding recommendations relating to council-owned or leased buildings from the council’s insurers be implemented immediately (P1/T3) Note:
The commission has prioritised its recommendations as either priority 1 (high), 2 (medium) or 3 (low) and provided a time-limit (T) by which the commission expects each to be completed should they be adopted. For example P1/T3 will represent a high priority recommendation with an expected time-limit of 3 months.
In responding to the commission's recommendations responsible authorities will be expected to identify specific milestones and target dates, resource implications and lead officers. Notes and thanks
Terms of reference and core questions
The commission was established by the Environment and Community Safety Scrutiny Sub-Committee in May 2012 with the following terms of reference:
- To investigate the current scale of metal-theft in Lambeth and the existing response to the issue across the relevant agencies
- To identify the impact of metal-theft on the borough's residents, community groups, council and businesses
- To feed into, influence the development of, and support the development of Lambeth’s response to Richard Ottaway MP's Private Members Bill
- To identify national and international best-practice in relation to the reduction of metal-theft
- To make evidence-based recommendations to the relevant decision-makers that will result in reductions in metal theft and other improvement to this policy area
The following core questions were identified by the commission at the start of its work:
- What trends regarding metal theft are emerging in the borough?
- What can the council do (together with its partners and the Metropolitan Police Service) to protect the buildings and monuments at risk?
- What can the council do to counteract the rise of metal theft?
- Having considered the government briefing on metal theft, what additional action can Lambeth as a borough and in partnership with neighbouring boroughs do to prevent and detect metal theft?
Methodology
The commission conducted three public information-gathering sessions as follows:
| Date | Location | Attendees | Role/Organisation | |------------|-------------------|----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------| | 30 July 2012 | Lambeth Town Hall | Cllr Jack Hopkins | Cabinet Member for Public Protection, LB Lambeth | | | | Adrian Smith | Divisional Director, Culture & Communities, LB Lambeth | | | | Nicole Terrieux | Community Safety Service, LB Lambeth | | | | Kristian Aspinall | Community Safety Service, LB Lambeth | | | | PC Rob Harrison | Lambeth Police | | | | Dave Bright | Head of Consumer Protection & Sustainability, HRE, Public Realm | The commission members attended the Local Government Association’s conference *Licensing scrap metal dealers: councils’ role in fighting metal theft* on 15 June 2012 at which representatives from British Transport Police, the Energy Networks Association, The Institute of Materials, Minerals and Mining, British Telecom, The British Metals Recycling Association, the Environment Agency, Chartered Institute of Environmental Health and best practice exemplars all spoke.
In addition the Chair met with Mark Harrison, National Policing and Crime Advisor, Heritage Crime Programme & Alliance to Reduce Crime against Heritage (ARCH), English Heritage and attended the ARCH Conference at City Hall in October 2012.
Councillors Braithwaite and Ogden undertook a site-visit of Glynn’s Metal Recycling, Loughborough Junction and met with the owner Paul Glynn and his staff.
At its inception the commission issued a press release. A survey was distributed to all faith groups known by the authority (100+) but only two responses were received. A considerable amount of desk-based research was also undertaken by the Scrutiny Team and fed back to the commission.
**Thanks**
The commission would like to extend its thanks to all those named above for their contributions to this piece of work. References
Bloomberg (2013) ‘Copper Climbs on Stimulus Signal, China Equities Jump’ Bloomberg [online], ://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-01-14/copper-climbs-on-stimulus-signal-china-equities-jump.html (last updated 14 January 2013; accessed January 2013)
Bradley et al. (January 2011) Assessing the Importance and value of historic buildings to young people: final report to English Heritage, Centre for Urban & Regional Development Studies, Newcastle University
British Metals Recycling Association (15 June 2012) ‘Metal Theft: the recycling industry perspective’ [presentation to LGA conference Licensing scrap metal dealers: councils’ role in fighting metal theft]
British Transport Police (2012a) ‘Freedom of Information request 978-12’ British Transport Police [online] ://www.btp.police.uk/pdf/FOI%20Response%20978-12%20Metal%20Theft%20totals.pdf (accessed January 2013)
British Transport Police (2012b) ‘Operation Tornado’ British Transport Police [online] ://www.btp.police.uk/advice_and_information/how_we_tackle_crime/operation_tornado.aspx (accessed January 2013)
Crowther P. Deputy Chief Constable (15 June 2012) ‘Keynote address’ British Transport Police [presentation to LGA conference Licensing scrap metal dealers: councils’ role in fighting metal theft]
Coomber J. Acting Inspector (October 2012) Lambeth Metal Crime Overview, Metropolitan Police
Giles G, Lloyd S and Playford P (17 September 2012) ‘Theft of Metal’ Ecclesiastical Insurance Group [presentation in Taunton]
Financial Times (2013) ‘ft.com/marketsdata: commodities’ Financial Times [online] ://markets.ft.com/research/Markets/Commodities (accessed January 2013)
Glander and Coomber (2012) Crime prevention and reduction – London Borough Case Studies: Metal Theft Reduction LB Bexley
Harrison, R. PC (8 November 2011) Emerging Metal Theft Issues – letter to the Chair of the Commission
LB Lambeth Metal Theft Commission (July 2012) Note of meeting
LB Lambeth Metal Theft Commission (October 2012) Note of meeting (handwritten)
LB Lambeth Metal Theft Commission (September 2012) Note of meeting
LB Lambeth Community Safety and Police (30 July 2012) Metal Theft Scrutiny Commission briefing note
LB Lambeth Public Realm Division (30 July 2012) Metal Theft Scrutiny Commission briefing note LB Lambeth Risk and Insurance Team (30 July 2012) *Metal Theft Insurance Claims briefing note*
LB Southwark (12 April 2012) ‘Art will not be bowed by metal thieves’ *Southwark Council* [online]\
://www.southwark.gov.uk/news/article/731/art_will_not_be_bowed_by_metal_thieves (accessed January 2013)
Home Office (22 February 2012) *Impact Assessment: Tackling Metal Theft - prohibit cash payments and higher fines*
House of Commons Library (10 July 2012) *Scrap Metal Dealers Bill – research paper 12/39*
House of Commons Transport Committee (Session 2010-12) ‘Cable theft on the railway – written evidence from the British Transport Police (CTR 11)’ *Parliament* [online]\
://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201012/cmselect/cmtran/writev/1609/ctr11.htm (accessed January 2013)
House of Commons Transport Committee (24 January 2012) *Cable theft on the railway*, London, The Stationery Office Limited
Local Government Association (October 2012) *Metal Theft Toolkit: Let’s prove our mettle*, London, Local Government Association
Metropolitan Police (31 January 2012) ‘Metal Theft Operation’ *Metropolitan Police* [online]\
://content.met.police.uk/News/Metal-Theft-Operation/1400006525080/1257246745756 (accessed January 2013)
Metropolitan Police (18 January 2013) ‘Safeguarding residents of Hillingdon and surrounding areas’ *Metropolitan Police* [online]\
://content.met.police.uk/News/Safeguarding-residents-of-Hillingdon-and-surrounding-areas/1400014458782/1257246745756 (accessed January 2013)
Sidebottom, A. (2012) ‘Metal Theft’ *UCL Jill Dando Institute* [online]\
://www.ucl.ac.uk/jdibrief/crime/metal-theft (accessed January 2013)
South London Press (24 May 2012) ‘I bought stolen plaque so I could give it back’ *South London Press* [online]\
://www.southlondonpress.co.uk/news.cfm?id=18772 (accessed January 2013) 7 September 2012
PUBLIC BILL COMMITTEE - SCRAP METAL DEALERS BILL AMENDMENTS
Dear
Here in Lambeth we have established a metal theft scrutiny commission to investigate what steps the council and others can take to reduce metal theft in and around the borough. This follows a spate of high-profile metal thefts here and in neighbouring authorities. Our work continues and we will be drawing our report and recommendations together in October.
The commission has a keen interest in the passage of the Scrap Metal Dealers Bill and we understand that you are on the Bill committee. We welcome proposals for local authority licensing of scrap metal dealers and consider the Bill a welcome addition to the tools that we and our partners can use to tackle the problem of metal theft.
However, from the work we have undertaken it is clear that the ability to impose local conditions on a licence would enable us and our neighbours to better target the particular issues that we face in Lambeth and across South London. This flexibility in the Licensing Act 2003 has already proved successful in enabling the authority to address the local circumstances we face, such as responding to street-drinking. We also believe that such conditions should be allowed irrespective of whether a licensee has been convicted of a relevant offence.
As such we urge you to support the amendments by Mr David Winnick to Page 3, Clause 3 that would enable the authority to employ other such conditions that are consistent with preventing crime.
Yours sincerely
Cllr Jennifer Brathwaite Chair, and on behalf of, LB Lambeth Metal Theft Scrutiny Commission Email: @lambeth.gov.uk
## Appendix B – List of Scrap Metal Dealers registered with LB Lambeth
| Name | Individual or company | Reason for registration | Premises address (if applicable) | Itinerant collector? | Date registered | Registration expires | |-------------------------------|-----------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|----------------------|------------------|---------------------| | Paul Barnaby | Individual | Occupies premises as scrap metal store | Arch 439 Gordon Grove, London, SE5 9DW | No | 14/09/2010 | 13/09/2013 | | Jose Carlos Rodriques | Individual | Does not occupy premises, lives in Lambeth | None | Yes | 08/03/2011 | 07/03/2014 | | Mr Tipper | Company | Occupies premises as scrap metal store | 1 Wellfit Street, London, SE24 0HJ | Yes | 05/08/2011 | 04/08/2014 | | Daniel Menino | Individual | Does not occupy premises, lives in Lambeth | None | No | 07/09/2011 | 06/09/2014 | | Glynn's Metal Recycling | Company | Occupies premises as scrap metal store | 3-11 Wellfit Street London SE24 0JA | Yes | 20/10/2011 | 19/10/2014 | | Carlos Alberto Abreu Ribeiro | Individual | Occupies premises as scrap metal store | Garage No 17, Stradle Road, London, SW4 6TE | Yes | 21/10/2011 | 20/10/2014 | | Jose Manuel Mendes Soares | Individual | Occupies premises as scrap metal store | Garage No 17, Stradle Road, London, SW4 6TE | Yes | 21/10/2011 | 20/10/2014 | | Adel Testouri | Individual | Does not occupy premises, lives in Lambeth | None | Yes | 01/02/2012 | 31/01/2015 | | John Virgo | Individual | Does not occupy premises, lives in Lambeth | None | Yes | 15/02/2012 | 14/02/2015 | | Mr Matthew Henderson | Individual | Does not occupy premises, lives in Lambeth | None | No | 20/03/2012 | 19/03/2015 | | Daniel Hewett | Individual | Does not occupy premises, lives in Lambeth | None | No | 08/05/2012 | 07/05/2015 | | JonJon Thompson & Variel Muir | Individual | Does not occupy premises, lives in Lambeth | None | No | 08/06/2012 | 07/06/2015 |
### SUMMARY/OVERVIEW
This action plan is the result of in-depth scrutiny of the issue in the borough by the Lambeth Metal Theft Scrutiny Commission.
In addition, Lambeth became the first Action to Reduce Heritage Crime (ARCH) borough in London in February 2012. By signing up to ARCH Lambeth has demonstrated its commitment to prioritising metal theft and has adopted a number of responsibilities in agreement with English Heritage which are set out within the Scrutiny Commission’s report.
The Metal Theft Scrutiny Commission has prioritised its recommendations as either priority 1 (high), 2 (medium) or 3 (low) and provided a time-limit (T) by which the commission expects each to be completed should they be adopted. For example P1/T3 will represent a high priority recommendation with an expected time-limit of 3 months. Progress against actions by accountable officers will be monitored and reviewed by the Commission.
| Ref | OBJECTIVES | ACTIONS | Lead agency | Lead officer | PRIORITY RANKING/ 1 = high | TIME LIMIT (in months) | Notes | |-----|------------|---------|-------------|--------------|---------------------------|------------------------|-------| | 1. | Develop intelligence: Increase intelligence of the scale and impact of metal theft in Lambeth to drive targeted, co-ordinated activity that secures the greatest impact for the least investment of resources | • Recognise heritage crime, including metal theft, as a priority for the borough through adoption of heritage crime as a priority for the council and the Safer Lambeth Partnership through inclusion in the annual Strategic Assessment and resulting Partnership Plan\
• Appoint a Councillor to act as Heritage Champion for the borough\
• Identify a single point of contact (SPOC) for the council for metal theft of sufficient seniority to direct officers and take a strategic approach\
• Confirm SPOC for metal theft in Lambeth Police (to be of senior rank)\
• Heads of Service from each responsible area to provide written report against compliance with ARCH criteria to next Scrutiny meeting\
• Report back on progress against the plan’s key milestones | Agency: Safer Lambeth partners\
Officer(s): Lambeth Council (LBL) Chief Executive/ Lambeth Police Borough Commander\
Cllr Lib Peck, Leader of Lambeth Council\
LBL\
Cllr Jack Hopkins/ Adrian Smith\
MPS\
Borough Commander\
LBL/ MPS\
Heads of service for designated areas\
LBL/MPS\
Lead officers as set out in action plan | P1/ T3 | P1/ T3 | P1/ T3 | P1/ T3 | P1/ T = next Scrutiny meeting | P1/ T = Scrutiny meetings going forwards | | Ref | OBJECTIVES | ACTIONS | Lead agency | Lead officer | PRIORITY RANKING/ 1 = high 2 = medium 3 = low | TIME LIMIT (in months) | Notes | |-----|------------|---------|-------------|-------------|-----------------------------------------------|------------------------|-------| | 1.2 | Scope scale and risk | • Carry out audit of existing assets, estimated value and risk, to baseline and scope scale and cost of metal theft in Lambeth\
• Establish priority list from assets audit, devise approach to target hardening and implement according to priority ranking and resources available\
• Establish risk re council buildings | LBL | Mark Nicolson, Insurance and Risk (MN) | P1/ T6 | | Initial evaluation of loss carried out. | | 1.3 | Build problem profile and co-ordinate intelligence | • Devise and introduce alert log to monitor overview of metal theft\
• Circulate key contacts with monthly info request/ update\
• Include a separate classification within CRIS to record metal theft\
• Promote use of metal theft tags on CRIS\
• Cross-refer reports of burglary (domestic/ non-domestic)\
• Compile initial intelligence profile based on existing database information | LBL | Community Safety Analyst | P3/ T9 | | Alert log to be submitted to Partnership Tasking and Co-ordination (PTAC) Group. Key contacts to be identified within council departments, MPS and partner organisations (e.g. BT) Resource to be identified. | | 1.4 | Improve partnership working with the full range of relevant partners | • Build links between the council and the British Transport Police 'fusion units' to ensure information, particularly red-flags on specific scrap metal dealers, is shared\
• Build links with the Environment Agency, British Telecom and neighbouring authorities to ensure an accurate picture of the number of dealers in and around the borough and to explore undertaking joint action | LBL | John Smith, Licensing | P1/ T6 | | | | 1.5 | Support legitimate Scrap Metal Dealers | • Supply checklist reminder and key contacts to report intelligence re suspicious activity or people | LBL | John Smith, Licensing | P1/ T3 | | See 3.1. | | 1.6 | Implement legislation as set out in the Scrap Metal Dealers’ Act | • Scope out process and determine fee levels based on cost recovery and within legislative limits | LBL | John Smith, Licensing | P2/ T6 | | Report on process, fee levels and anticipated income to next Scrutiny meeting. | | 1.7 | Ensure value for money in disposal of council assets, refurbishment of Housing schemes and properties, and in regeneration programmes | • Report back to Environment and Community Safety Sub-Committee on how the council disposes of its own scrap metal to ensure that the value is returned to the council | LBL | Sue Foster, Housing Regeneration and Environment | P3/ T6 | | | | 2. | Prevention: Deter, delay and disrupt offending through co-ordinated activity | | | | | | | 2.1 | Protect most vulnerable assets | • Devise approach to target hardening and implement according to priority ranking and resources available\
• Carry out predictive patrolling in vulnerable locations with support from Trading Standards | LBL/ MPS NT/ MPS nominated officer | MPS/ LBL Trading Standards | P2/ T12 | | Following evaluation and prioritisation of assets (see 1.1 above). | | Ref | OBJECTIVES | ACTIONS | Lead agency | Lead officer | PRIORITY RANKING/ 1 = high | TIME LIMIT (in months) | Notes | |-----|------------|---------|-------------|--------------|-----------------------------|------------------------|-------| | | | • Implement all outstanding recommendations relating to council-owned or leased buildings from the council’s insurers with immediate effect | LBL | Uchuchukwu Nwanze, Valuation and Asset Management Services | Marc Nicolson | P1/ T3 | | | | | • Compile briefing on metal theft and key contacts for dissemination to CCTV Manager/ monitoring staff | MPS/LBL | Nominated officer/ NT | | | | | | | • Provide list of heritage and memorial assets to CCTV Manager | | | | | | | | | • Replace all metal equipment in council owned public toilets with plastic where possible | LBL/ MPS | MPS nominated officer/ NT/ LBL Facilities Mgt/ Parks | | P3/ T12 (see right) | Dependant on compilation of initial inventory of assets To be costed Dependant on costings | | 2.2 | Reduce opportunities for metal theft | • Build metal theft vulnerability considerations into requirements for new developments in the borough through Secured By Design (SBD) approach | MPS/ LBL | MPS: PC Rob Harrison/ PC Anne Burroughs LBL: Planning nominated officer | | P1/ T3 | | | | | • Compile war memorials database | LBL/ MPS | LBL NT | | P2/ T6 | All known war memorials in the borough are logged on the In Memoriam 2014 database. Lambeth is the first ARCH borough in London. | | | | • Rank according to ‘Protect most vulnerable assets’ above | | | | | | | | | • Protect most vulnerable war memorials with Smartwater | | | | | | | | | • Apply for membership to the ‘Alliance to reduce Crime Against Heritage’ through English Heritage | | | | | | | | | • Establish SPOCs for each denomination for churches/ religious buildings in Lambeth at risk from metal theft | MPS/LBL | Nominated officer/ NT | | P3/ T12 | Will need to establish what assistance we can offer and our approach before making contact | | | | • Launch Lambeth as Urban Heritage Watch borough in association with English Heritage | LBL | NT | | P2/ T6 | | | 2.3 | Protect Community assets: Heritage buildings/ Churches/ Public art/ War memorials | • Share intelligence re scheduled streetworks through inclusion of MPS SPOC in distribution of weekly circulation list | LBL | Doug Perry | | P1/ T3 | Underway as at July 2012, however needs to be refreshed for MPS SPOC (to be nominated by Borough Commander) | | | | • Agree and establish approach re unscheduled emergency streetworks | LBL/ MPS | Doug Perry/ MPS SPOC | | P1/ T3 | Unscheduled works are alerted on ad hoc basis to specific named individuals. Email list can be updated once SPOC alerted. | | | | • Establish approach and published protocol re verification of on-site contractors by MPS | LBL/ MPS | Doug Perry/ MPS SPOC | | P2/ T6 | | | | | • Agree council 24/7 contact for MPS to check sites, contractors and activity | LBL/ MPS | Doug Perry/ MPS SPOC | | P2/ T6 | Agree council SPOC or publicise rota. | | 2.4 | Protect highways infrastructure and street furniture (Council) | • Mirroring approach in 2.4 above, establish approach with TfL | LBL/ MPS | NT/ MPS SPOC | | P2/ T9 | Establish TfL contact | | 2.5 | Protect highways infrastructure and street furniture(TfL) | | | | | | | | Ref | OBJECTIVES | ACTIONS | Lead agency | PRIORITY RANKING/ 1 = high 2 = medium 3 = low | TIME LIMIT (in months) | Notes | |-----|------------|---------|-------------|-----------------------------------------------|------------------------|-------| | 2.6 | Protect partner assets | BT: UK Power networks; Thames Water
- Share intelligence re scheduled utility works through inclusion of MPS SPOC and Council CCTV Manager in distribution of weekly circulation list for each agency
- Agree and establish approach re unscheduled emergency utility works | LBL/ MPS\
Doug Perry/ MPS SPOC | P2/ T6 | | | | 2.7 | Reduce impact on emergency services |
- Compile inventory of dry riser inlets in housing blocks – location and state condition
- Undertake an urgent audit of the presence of dry-riser valves at the borough's communal housing blocks and consider introducing warning signs and security at dry-riser locations | LBL to compile in partnership with housing providers\
Phase 1: Lambeth Living\
Phase 2: other social housing providers operating in the borough | Phase 1 P1/ T6 – inventory\
Phase 1 P1/ T12 - secure\
Phase 2 P2/ T12 – inventory\
Phase 2 P2/ T18 - secure | | This action especially important re fire safety | | 2.8 | Reduce the likelihood of terrorist attack and its impact |
- Assess vulnerability to communications links for command and control centre (Police stations/ Main Command Centre – Lambeth)
- Assess vulnerability to communications links for CCTV control room
- Ensure communications system back up plan in place | LBL Stephen Tippell/ MPS\
Counter-terrorism/ LBL Paul Randall/ CCTV Manager | P1/ T6 | | Communications back-up plan in place for MPS buildings |
### 3. Enforcement
| Ref | OBJECTIVES | ACTIONS | Lead agency | PRIORITY RANKING/ 1 = high 2 = medium 3 = low | TIME LIMIT (in months) | Notes | |-----|------------|---------|-------------|-----------------------------------------------|------------------------|-------| | 3.1 | Establish ongoing regime of engagement and monitoring of registered scrap metal dealers (SMDs). |
- Compile and maintain master list of registered SMDs
- Carry out joint visits 4 x per year\
Ensure that registered dealers are adhering to legislation re cashless payments. | LBL Licensing/ Trading Standards | P1/ T6 | Ongoing re visits | When designing an ongoing regime of engagement and monitoring of SMDs the regime is required to utilise the full range of powers currently available to the council and ensure compliance with the terms of existing registrations. | | 3.2 | Lead on the development and implementation of a voluntary code of conduct for SMDs |
- Lead on the development and implementation of a voluntary code of conduct for SMDs in the borough based on best practice identified in the Lambeth Metal Theft Scrutiny Commission report
- Following the development of the draft code of conduct lead on negotiations with neighbouring boroughs to secure commitment to implementing the code across the sub-region, laying the foundations for future partnership work against metal theft and demonstrate to the rest of London that by working together metal theft can be driven out of the area | LBL Cabinet Member Cllr Jack Hopkins/ LBL Licensing\
LBL Cabinet Member Cllr Jack Hopkins/ Chair of Lambeth Metal Theft Scrutiny Commission/ LBL Licensing | P1/ T3\
P2/T6 | | Liaise with Lambeth MPS and Operation Ferrous | | 3.3 | Establish ongoing regime of engagement and monitoring of registered Motor Salvage Operators (MSOs) also known as ‘car breakers’. |
- Compile and maintain master list of registered MSOs
- Carry out joint visits 4 x per year (MPS/ Trading Standards/ Licensing) to check compliance in most cases with MPS support. | LBL Licensing/ Trading Standards | P1/ T6 | Ongoing re visits | One listed SMD in borough.\
Theft of motor vehicles has risen in other boroughs. Rate appears to have remained stable in Lambeth. Theft of motor vehicle | | Ref | OBJECTIVES | ACTIONS | Lead agency | PRIORITY RANKING/ 1 = high 2 = medium 3 = low TIME LIMIT (in months) | Notes | |-----|------------|---------|-------------|-------------------------------------------------|-------| | | | • Develop compulsory guidance material for MSOs to adhere to continue lawfully trading | Lead agency | P1/ T6 | sensors appears to be increasing. | | | | • Contact itinerant dealers and Scrap Metal Dealers (where possible) to ensure full compliance with current legislation and regulatory requirements | Lead officer | P1/ T6 | | | | | • Create application forms for new and existing businesses following guidance from Central Government. Design form will follow legislative requirements | | P1/ T6 | | | 3.4 | Target metal thieves, illegal scrap metal dealers and Motor Salvage Operators. | • Compile and maintain master intel list on unregistered SMD premises and operators for legal sanction | MPS/ LBL | P1/ T6 | | | | | • Undertake joint operations such as Operation Cubo and Metal Theft Days of Action | Intel list to be led by Licensing/ Trading Standards with MPS | P1/ T6 | | | | | • Consider equipping all officers on street duties with portable infrared lights to enable them to immediately identify property marking such as Smartwater | ANPR ops – joint with Licensing (e.g. Op Cubo) | P1/ T6 | Operations: Ongoing | | | | • Compile and maintain master intel list on unregistered SMD premises and operators for legal sanction | MPS | P2/ T6 | | | | | • Undertake joint operations such as Operation Cubo and Metal Theft Days of Action | Borough Commander | P2/ T6 | | | | | • Consider equipping all officers on street duties with portable infrared lights to enable them to immediately identify property marking such as Smartwater | | P2/ T6 | | | 3.5 | Share intelligence and good practice | • Share intel re current picture with Croydon and neighbouring boroughs | LBL/ MPS | P2/ T6 | | | | | • Establish initial MPS/ Council borough network with Croydon, Bexley, Southwark to share intel and good practice | NT/ nominated MPS SPOC | P2/ T6 | | | 3.6 | Target metal theft repeat offenders | • Flag details of known/ previous offenders via ANPR operations | MPS/ LBL | P2/ T6 | | | 4. | Awareness and reassurance: Increase awareness of metal theft, incidents and risk; the community role in reducing metal theft, methods of reporting; and Partnership activity | • Regular item at P-TAC | LBL/ MPS | P2/ T6 (PTAC: Ongoing – every two weeks) | Approach to include definition, what to do and who to contact | | 4.1 | Increase awareness of metal theft, incidents and risk | • Raise awareness of metal theft in Lambeth to residents to encourage detection and reporting of theft. Include SNTs, Neighbourhood Watch; TRAs and Lambeth Living; Friends of Parks. Church wardens or Vicars. | LBL/ MPS | P2/ T6 | | | | | • Make clear to residents what number they should call if they witness suspicious activity | LBL NT | P2/ T6 | | | | | • Identify opportunities for joint training between the police, council officers and partners so that each are aware of each other’s issues and powers | MPS contact tbc by Borough Commander | P1/ T9 | | | | | • Regular item at P-TAC | LBL | | | | | | • Raise awareness of metal theft in Lambeth to residents to encourage detection and reporting of theft. Include SNTs, Neighbourhood Watch; TRAs and Lambeth Living; Friends of Parks. Church wardens or Vicars. | LBL | | | | | | • Make clear to residents what number they should call if they witness suspicious activity | Community Safety/ Lambeth Police ‘crib sheet’ Communications – wider awareness | | | | | | • Identify opportunities for joint training between the police, council officers and partners so that each are aware of each other’s issues and powers | LBL/ MPS | | | | | | • Regular item at P-TAC | Licensing/ MPS SPOC | | | | Ref | OBJECTIVES | ACTIONS | Lead agency | Lead officer | PRIORITY RANKING/ 1 = high 2 = medium 3 = low TIME LIMIT (in months) | Notes | |-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|--------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------| | 4.2 | **Build awareness among frontline officers** | • Develop and distribute factsheet and key contacts for MPS SNTs and all council staff to focus on frontline staff\
• MPS contact tbc by Borough Commander | LBL/ MPS | LBL NT | P2/ T6 | Planned activity to coincide with national days of action (at least 4 releases per year). | | 4.3 | **Develop public awareness through a communications forward plan which reflects the themes set out within 4 above** | • Provide press releases to publicise related activity and promote successes in combating metal theft.\
• Link with British Telecom’s public relations team to identify opportunities for a shared communications campaign | LBL/ MPS | LBL and MPS officers responsible for actions as set out in this plan/ Claire Melia\
LBL Communications/ Community Safety | P2/ T3 | P1/ T6 | P1/ T6 | | NO HONOUR Amongst Metal Thieves
Thieves stole the identity of our heroes, now it’s time to reveal their identity
Call Crimestoppers 0800 555 111
BEXLEY POLICE NOTICE THEFT OF GATE VALVES FROM HIGH RISE BLOCKS
Gate valves are being stolen from high rise blocks in the north of the borough. The Fire Brigade use these valves in the event of a fire to distribute water to all levels of a building.
STEALING GATE VALVES PUTS LIVES AT RISK!
BEXLEY POLICE ARE WORKING WITH OTHER AGENCIES TO IDENTIFY THOSE INVOLVED AND PREVENT FURTHER THEFTS
If you know of anyone involved in the theft of gate valves please contact Bexley Police on 0300 123 1212 or, to remain anonymous call Crime Stoppers on 0800 555 111.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0189-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 52,
"total-input-tokens": 101849,
"total-output-tokens": 26139,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
134,
1
],
[
134,
3979,
2
],
[
3979,
5648,
3
],
[
5648,
7593,
4
],
[
7593,
9392,
5
],
[
9392,
11877,
6
],
[
11877,
14156,
7
],
[
14156,
16566,
8
],
[
16566,
18871,
9
],
[
18871,
21238,
10
],
[
21238,
22803,
11
],
[
22803,
25048,
12
],
[
25048,
26564,
13
],
[
26564,
27382,
14
],
[
27382,
30021,
15
],
[
30021,
32616,
16
],
[
32616,
35021,
17
],
[
35021,
37595,
18
],
[
37595,
40400,
19
],
[
40400,
42685,
20
],
[
42685,
44706,
21
],
[
44706,
46878,
22
],
[
46878,
49321,
23
],
[
49321,
51951,
24
],
[
51951,
54420,
25
],
[
54420,
56913,
26
],
[
56913,
59391,
27
],
[
59391,
61929,
28
],
[
61929,
64451,
29
],
[
64451,
66658,
30
],
[
66658,
69128,
31
],
[
69128,
71908,
32
],
[
71908,
74043,
33
],
[
74043,
74652,
34
],
[
74652,
77182,
35
],
[
77182,
77882,
36
],
[
77882,
79855,
37
],
[
79855,
81702,
38
],
[
81702,
82206,
39
],
[
82206,
84675,
40
],
[
84675,
85963,
41
],
[
85963,
88245,
42
],
[
88245,
90089,
43
],
[
90089,
91746,
44
],
[
91746,
95112,
45
],
[
95112,
97701,
46
],
[
97701,
101012,
47
],
[
101012,
104537,
48
],
[
104537,
108509,
49
],
[
108509,
112608,
50
],
[
112608,
114827,
51
],
[
114827,
115535,
52
]
]
} |
dee42a83e53c730c2dc3309ae571a05cc786cef1 | STATISTICAL RELEASE
2011 UK GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS, FINAL FIGURES
DECC today publishes final 2011 estimates of UK greenhouse gas emissions.
Greenhouse gas emissions - headline results
- In 2011, UK emissions of the basket of six greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol were estimated to be 552.6 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO₂e). This was 7.0 per cent lower than the 2010 figure of 594.0 million tonnes. Between 2010 and 2011 the largest decreases were experienced in the residential sector, down 22.5 per cent (20.2 MtCO₂e), and the energy supply sector, down by 6.5 per cent (13.3 MtCO₂e). Emissions from the business, transport, industrial process and public sectors were also down slightly on 2010, but all other sectors were relatively stable compared to 2010 levels.
- Carbon dioxide (CO₂) is the main greenhouse gas, accounting for about 83 per cent of total UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2011. In 2011, UK net emissions of carbon dioxide were estimated to be 458.6 million tonnes (Mt). This was around 7.9 per cent lower than the 2010 figure of 497.8 Mt. There were notable decreases in emissions from the residential sector, down by 23.3 per cent (20.2 Mt), and from the energy supply sector, down 6.7 per cent (13.2 Mt). Again, emissions from the business, transport and public sectors were slightly down on 2010, but all other sectors were relatively unchanged.
- The overall decrease in emissions in 2011 has primarily resulted from a fall in residential gas use, combined with a reduction in demand for electricity accompanied by lower use of gas and greater use of nuclear power for electricity generation. Although these factors mainly affected emissions of carbon dioxide, any change in CO₂ emissions is likely to drive a similar change in total emissions.
- All the sectoral breakdowns included in this statistical release are based on the source of the emissions, as opposed to where the end-user activity occurred. Emissions related to electricity generation are therefore attributed to power stations, the source of these emissions, rather than homes and businesses where electricity is used. The headline results are shown in Table 1 and Figure 1 below. Note that the 2010 figures have been revised since the previous publication in February 2012; further details of this revision can be found later in this statistical release.
The time series for selected years since 1990 is shown in Table 21 towards the end of this statistical release.
**Table 1: Emissions of greenhouse gases (MtCO₂e)**
| | 2010 | 2011 | Change | |------------------------|------|------|--------| | Total greenhouse gas emissions | 594.0 | 552.6 | -7.0% | | Carbon dioxide emissions | 497.8 | 458.6 | -7.9% |
Carbon dioxide emissions figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies; Total greenhouse gas emissions figures also include some Overseas Territories. Emissions are reported as net emissions, to include removals from the atmosphere by carbon sinks.
**Figure 1: Emissions of greenhouse gases, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)**
Coverage of emissions reporting
The basket of greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol consists of six gases: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride. These last three gases are collectively referred to as fluorinated compounds. In accordance with international reporting and carbon trading protocols, each of these gases is weighted by its global warming potential (GWP), so that total greenhouse gas emissions can be reported on a consistent basis. The GWP for each gas is defined as its warming influence relative to that of carbon dioxide. Greenhouse gas emissions are then presented in carbon dioxide equivalent units.
Carbon dioxide is reported in terms of net emissions, which means total emissions minus total removals of CO₂ from the atmosphere by carbon sinks. Carbon sinks are incorporated within the Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) sector, which covers afforestation, reforestation, deforestation and forest management. They are defined by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as “any process, activity or mechanism which removes a greenhouse gas, an aerosol or a precursor of a greenhouse gas from the atmosphere”.
Unless otherwise stated, any figures included in this release represent emissions within the UK and its Crown Dependencies (Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man).
Reporting of greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol is based on emissions in the UK, its Crown Dependencies, and those Overseas Territories (Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands, Gibraltar and Montserrat) that are party to the UK ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. This now includes emissions from all direct flights and shipping between the UK and these Territories. The Kyoto Protocol also uses a narrower definition of carbon sinks than that applied for domestic UK CO₂ reporting, which therefore results in a slightly different total. These adjustments mean that the greenhouse gas basket reported for Kyoto differs slightly from the sum of the individual gases as shown.
Reporting of greenhouse gas emissions for the UK’s Carbon Budgets only includes emissions within the UK, and excludes both Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories.
A more detailed summary of the coverage and breakdown can be found in the data tables which accompany this release. Emissions by gas and source sector
Greenhouse gas emissions are reported here in two ways: either by gas, or by the source sector of the emissions.
When broken down by gas, UK emissions are dominated by carbon dioxide, which accounted for about 83 per cent of the UK’s greenhouse gas emissions in 2011. Weighted by global warming potential, methane accounted for about 8 per cent of UK emissions and nitrous oxide for about 6 per cent of emissions in 2011. Fluorinated gases accounted for the remainder, around 3 per cent.
Looking instead at the breakdown by sector, in 2011 35 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions were from the energy supply sector, 21 per cent from transport, 16 per cent from business, 13 per cent from the residential sector and 9 per cent from agriculture. The other 6 per cent were attributable to the remaining sectors; waste management, industrial process, the public sector and LULUCF.
Figures 2 and 3 below show the breakdown of 2011 UK greenhouse emissions by gas and sector. Note that Figure 3 does not include emissions from the LULUCF sector, since in 2011 this sector acted as a net sink, and emissions were therefore effectively negative.
Figure 2: Greenhouse gas emissions by gas, 2011
Figure 3: Greenhouse gas emissions by source sector, 2011 (excluding LULUCF) Table 2 below shows the two-way breakdown of 2011 emissions by both gas and source sector, in absolute terms. Table 3 then shows how these figures translate into percentages of the UK’s total emissions. Note that emissions from the LULUCF sector have been excluded from Table 3, since in 2011 these were effectively negative.
**Table 2: Breakdown of 2011 UK greenhouse gas emissions by gas and sector (MtCO$\_2$e)**
| Sector | Carbon dioxide | Methane | Nitrous oxide | Fluorinated gases | Total | |-----------------|----------------|---------|---------------|-------------------|--------| | Energy Supply | 182.2 | 7.3 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 190.9 | | Transport | 117.4 | 0.1 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 118.5 | | Business | 75.6 | 0.2 | 0.9 | 12.4 | 89.1 | | Residential | 66.4 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 2.7 | 69.7 | | Agriculture | 4.2 | 17.9 | 29.2 | 0.0 | 51.2 | | Waste Management| 0.3 | 15.8 | 1.3 | 0.0 | 17.3 | | Industrial Process| 9.5 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.4 | 10.2 | | Public | 7.1 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 7.1 | | LULUCF | -3.9 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 0.0 | -3.3 | | **Total** | **458.6** | **41.9**| **34.7** | **15.5** | **550.7**|
**Table 3: Breakdown of 2011 UK greenhouse gas emissions by gas and sector (% of total UK emissions, excluding LULUCF)**
| Sector | Carbon dioxide | Methane | Nitrous oxide | Fluorinated gases | Total | |-----------------|----------------|---------|---------------|-------------------|--------| | Energy Supply | 32.9% | 1.3% | 0.3% | 0.0% | 34.5% | | Transport | 21.2% | 0.0% | 0.2% | 0.0% | 21.4% | | Business | 13.6% | 0.0% | 0.2% | 2.2% | 16.1% | | Residential | 12.0% | 0.1% | 0.0% | 0.5% | 12.6% | | Agriculture | 0.8% | 3.2% | 5.3% | 0.0% | 9.2% | | Waste Management| 0.0% | 2.8% | 0.2% | 0.0% | 3.1% | | Industrial Process| 1.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 1.8% | | Public | 1.3% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 1.3% | | **Total** | **83.5%** | **7.6%**| **6.2%** | **2.8%** | **100.0%**| Emissions by sector
Table 4 and Figure 4 below show the breakdown of greenhouse gas emissions into the main source sectors for selected years between 1990 and 2011.
Table 4: Sources of greenhouse gas emissions, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)
| Sector | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |-------------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| | Energy Supply | 272.4 | 234.0 | 218.5 | 227.5 | 198.7 | 204.3 | 190.9 | | Transport | 121.5 | 122.1 | 126.7 | 130.3 | 121.7 | 120.1 | 118.5 | | Business | 115.3 | 110.3 | 114.0 | 108.2 | 91.4 | 91.9 | 89.1 | | Residential | 80.8 | 82.3 | 90.2 | 87.8 | 78.1 | 89.9 | 69.7 | | Agriculture | 63.7 | 62.6 | 59.2 | 55.5 | 50.6 | 51.2 | | | Waste Management | 47.4 | 41.4 | 30.8 | 20.4 | 18.5 | 17.9 | 17.3 | | Industrial Process| 54.7 | 45.1 | 24.7 | 18.8 | 10.8 | 11.7 | 10.2 | | Public | 13.1 | 12.8 | 11.5 | 11.1 | 8.3 | 8.4 | 7.1 | | LULUCF | 4.0 | 3.3 | 0.4 | -2.6 | -3.8 | -3.7 | -3.3 | | Total | 772.9 | 713.8 | 675.9 | 657.0 | 574.3 | 591.7 | 550.7 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
Figure 4: Greenhouse gas emissions by source, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)
Details of changes over time for each sector are set out in the following sections of this statistical release. In each case, information about the trend between 1990 and 2010 provides some context, followed by details of the changes since 2010 now seen in the 2011 estimates. **Energy supply**
The energy supply sector was responsible for 35 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2011, with carbon dioxide being by far the most prominent gas for this sector.
**Context – 1990 to 2010**
Between 1990 and 2010, there was a general downward trend in greenhouse gas emissions from the energy supply sector, resulting in a reduction of around 25 per cent.
The downward trend over the period has primarily been driven by reductions in emissions related to electricity generation at power stations. This decrease has resulted from a combination of changes in mix of fuel being used for generation together with greater efficiency due to improvements in technology. It is difficult to assess the relative impacts of the two, but it is likely that the majority of the saving since 1990 will have been due to fuel switching from coal to gas for generation; there has been an overall decline in the use of coal at power stations over the period, accompanied by an overall increase in the use of gas, which has a lower carbon content. Coal use in generation has roughly halved since 1990.
Changes in the fuel mix for UK electricity generation since 1990 are shown in Figure 5 below.
**Figure 5: Fuel mix for UK electricity generation, 1990-2011 (MtOe)**
The other main factor which has noticeably contributed to the decline in emissions has been in relation to coal mining; the production of deep-mined coal in particular has declined steadily over the period, with emissions from this source having fallen by 16 MtCO$\_2$e since 1990.
2011 results
Between 2010 and 2011 emissions from the energy supply sector fell by 6.5 per cent (13.3 MtCO$\_2$e). This decrease can almost entirely be attributed to power stations. Demand for electricity was around 3 per cent lower in 2011 than in 2010, and there was also a change in the fuel mix used at power stations for electricity generation. The technical problems which had been experienced at some nuclear power stations in 2010 were resolved, and there was therefore more nuclear power available for electricity generation in 2011. Consequently, there was an 18 per cent decrease in gas use for generation, alongside a 12 per cent increase in the use of nuclear power. The sharp decrease observed in 2011 put gas usage at power stations at its lowest level since 1998. Together, these changes resulted in a decrease of around 8 per cent in emissions from electricity generation. In 2011, total greenhouse gas emissions from power stations, at 145.3 Mt, accounted for just under a quarter of all UK greenhouse gas emissions.
It should also be mentioned that between 1990 and 2011, final consumption of electricity increased by around 15 per cent; domestic electricity consumption in particular was just over 20 per cent higher in 2011 than in 1990.
The breakdown of emissions by gas for selected years since 1990 is shown in Table 5 below. The trend in emissions over the period is shown in Figure 6.
Table 5: Energy supply sector emissions by gas, 1990-2011 (MtCO$\_2$e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |----------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| | Carbon dioxide | 241.5 | 210.0 | 203.0 | 216.5 | 212.5 | 189.5 | 195.3 | 182.2 | | Methane | 28.9 | 22.2 | 13.8 | 9.4 | 7.9 | 7.8 | 7.6 | 7.3 | | Nitrous oxide | 2.1 | 1.8 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 1.5 | 1.4 | 1.4 | 1.5 | | F-gases | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | | Total | 272.4 | 234.0 | 218.5 | 227.5 | 221.9 | 198.7 | 204.3 | 190.9 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories. Transport
The transport sector was responsible for around 21 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2011, with carbon dioxide being by far the most prominent gas. Emissions of CO$\_2$ are closely related to the amount of fuel used, whilst nitrous oxide and methane emissions are influenced more by the vehicle type and age.
Context – 1990 to 2010
Between 1990 and 2010, there was very little overall change in the level of greenhouse gas emissions from the transport sector (emissions were around 1 per cent lower in 2010 than in 1990), although emissions did in fact increase up to 2007 and then fall again from 2008 onwards.
Road transport is the most significant source of emissions in this sector, passenger cars in particular, and the changes which have been seen over the period were heavily influenced by this category. Whilst there has been a decrease in emissions from passenger cars over the period, this was partially offset by an increase in emissions from light duty vehicles. Although there has been an increase in both the number of passenger vehicles and the vehicle kilometres travelled, the decrease in emissions from passenger cars has been due to lower petrol consumption outweighing an increase in diesel consumption.
2011 results
Between 2010 and 2011 emissions from transport fell by 1.4 per cent (1.7 MtCO$\_2$e). This decrease was primarily due, again, to a decrease in petrol consumption alongside a relatively smaller increase in diesel consumption. The breakdown of emissions by gas for selected years since 1990 is shown in Table 6 below. The trend in emissions over the period is shown in Figure 7.
**Table 6: Transport sector emissions by gas, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)**
| Year | Carbon dioxide | Methane | Nitrous oxide | F-gases | Total | |------|----------------|---------|---------------|---------|-------| | 1990 | 119.5 | 0.6 | 1.3 | 0.0 | 121.5 | | 1995 | 119.8 | 0.5 | 1.8 | 0.0 | 122.1 | | 2000 | 124.8 | 0.3 | 1.5 | 0.0 | 126.7 | | 2005 | 128.9 | 0.2 | 1.2 | 0.0 | 130.3 | | 2008 | 125.5 | 0.1 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 126.6 | | 2009 | 120.7 | 0.1 | 0.9 | 0.0 | 121.7 | | 2010 | 119.1 | 0.1 | 0.9 | 0.0 | 120.1 | | 2011 | 117.4 | 0.1 | 1.0 | 0.0 | 118.5 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
**Figure 7: Greenhouse gas emissions from transport, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)**
______________________________________________________________________
**Business**
The business sector was responsible for 16 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2011, with carbon dioxide again being the most prominent gas. Emissions from this sector primarily relate to fossil fuel combustion in industry and commerce, although emissions of F-gases from the use of fluorinated compounds in certain applications, particularly refrigeration and air-conditioning, are not insignificant.
**Context – 1990 to 2010**
Between 1990 and 2010, there was a general downward trend in greenhouse gas emissions from the business sector, resulting in an overall decrease of around 20 per cent. This has been largely due to a reduction in emissions from industrial combustion (including iron and steel) over the period. Although emissions of carbon dioxide have reduced over the period (by 30 per cent), emissions from F-gases have increased significantly. This has mainly been due to an increase in emissions from refrigeration and air-conditioning; between 1993 and 2002, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) were used to replace other, ozone depleting, substances which were previously used as refrigerants. This increasing trend has since slowed, as tighter controls on emissions leakages have been introduced.
2011 results
Between 2010 and 2011 emissions from business fell by 3.0 per cent (2.8 MtCO$\_2$e). This decrease was mainly driven by a fall in carbon dioxide emissions across industry and commerce as a whole.
The breakdown of emissions by gas for selected years since 1990 is shown in Table 7 below. The trend in emissions over the period is shown in Figure 8.
Table 7: Business sector emissions by gas, 1990-2011 (MtCO$\_2$e)
| Year | Carbon dioxide | Methane | Nitrous oxide | F-gases | Total | |------|----------------|---------|---------------|---------|-------| | 1990 | 112.8 | 0.3 | 1.6 | 0.7 | 115.3 | | 1995 | 106.6 | 0.3 | 1.5 | 1.9 | 110.3 | | 2000 | 107.0 | 0.3 | 1.3 | 5.3 | 114.0 | | 2005 | 97.1 | 0.3 | 1.3 | 9.5 | 108.2 | | 2008 | 90.1 | 0.3 | 1.2 | 11.3 | 102.8 | | 2009 | 78.5 | 0.2 | 1.0 | 11.7 | 91.4 | | 2010 | 78.5 | 0.2 | 1.0 | 12.1 | 91.9 | | 2011 | 75.6 | 0.2 | 0.9 | 12.4 | 89.1 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
Figure 8: Greenhouse gas emissions from business, 1990-2011 (MtCO$\_2$e) Residential
The residential sector was responsible for around 13 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2011, with carbon dioxide being the most prominent gas for this sector.
It should be noted that since these figures are estimates of emissions by source, for carbon dioxide they only include emissions related to residential fossil fuel use. These emissions are therefore primarily related to activities such as heating and cooking. Emissions related to residential electricity use, including for heating, are attributable to power stations, which are the source of these emissions, and are therefore included in the energy supply sector.
Context – 1990 to 2010
Between 1990 and 2010, there was considerable variation in greenhouse gas emissions from year to year in the residential sector, although since 2004 there has been a general downward trend, although 2010 was an exception to this trend due to the particularly cold weather experienced in that year. Emissions of F-gases in this sector, which have increased slightly since 1990, are related to the use of aerosols and metered dose inhalers.
2011 results
Between 2010 and 2011 there was a decrease of around 23 per cent (20.2 MtCO$\_2$e) in emissions from this sector, the highest decrease for any single sector in both absolute and percentage terms. This was due to a decrease in the use of all fossil fuels, gas in particular. Compared with the long term average, 2011 was a warm year; in particular, it was significantly warmer than 2010. In the first and last quarters, 2011 was warmer than 2010 by 2.2 and 4.1 degrees Celsius respectively. This heavily contributed to a significant reduction in the use of natural gas for space heating, which was reflected by a similar fall in emissions.
Emissions from this sector are now at their lowest level since 1990.
In general, carbon dioxide emissions from this sector in particular are heavily influenced by external temperatures. Since April 2012, DECC have published quarterly emissions estimates which incorporate an assessment of the impact of temperatures on emissions. Further details of these estimates can be found later in this statistical release.
The breakdown of emissions by gas for selected years since 1990 is shown in Table 8 below. The trend in emissions over the period is shown in Figure 9. Table 8: Residential sector emissions by gas, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Carbon dioxide | 79.0 | 80.8 | 87.1 | 84.3 | 79.9 | 74.7 | 86.5 | 66.4 | | Methane | 1.5 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.5 | | Nitrous oxide | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | | F-gases | 0.0 | 0.4 | 2.2 | 3.0 | 2.9 | 2.8 | 2.7 | 2.7 | | Total | 80.8 | 82.3 | 90.2 | 87.8 | 83.4 | 78.1 | 89.9 | 69.7 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
Figure 9: Greenhouse gas emissions from the residential sector, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)
Agriculture
The agriculture sector was responsible for 9 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2011. Emissions of methane and nitrous oxide dominate this sector. The most significant sources here are emissions of methane due to enteric fermentation from livestock, particularly cattle, and nitrous oxide emissions related to the use of fertilisers on agricultural soils.
Context – 1990 to 2010
Between 1990 and 2010, there was a general downward trend in greenhouse gas emissions from this sector, resulting in an overall decrease of around 20 per cent. This reduction has been driven by a fall in animal numbers over the period, together with a decrease in synthetic fertiliser use. 2011 results
Between 2010 and 2011 there was virtually no change in emissions from the agriculture sector.
The breakdown of emissions by gas for selected years since 1990 is shown in Table 9 below. The trend in emissions over the period shown in Figure 10.
Table 9: Agriculture sector emissions by gas, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)
| Year | Carbon dioxide | Methane | Nitrous oxide | F-gases | Total | |------|----------------|---------|---------------|---------|-------| | 1990 | 5.2 | 22.4 | 36.1 | 0.0 | 63.7 | | 1995 | 5.3 | 21.6 | 35.6 | 0.0 | 62.6 | | 2000 | 4.8 | 20.4 | 34.0 | 0.0 | 59.2 | | 2005 | 4.6 | 19.1 | 31.8 | 0.0 | 55.5 | | 2008 | 4.1 | 18.2 | 29.1 | 0.0 | 51.4 | | 2009 | 4.1 | 17.9 | 28.7 | 0.0 | 50.6 | | 2010 | 4.1 | 18.0 | 29.1 | 0.0 | 51.2 | | 2011 | 4.2 | 17.9 | 29.2 | 0.0 | 51.2 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
Figure 10: Greenhouse gas emissions from agriculture, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)
Waste management
The waste management sector was responsible for around 3 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2011, with methane being by far the most prominent gas. The vast majority of these emissions are from landfill sites. Context – 1990 to 2010
Between 1990 and 2010, there was a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the waste management sector, resulting in an overall decrease of around 62 per cent. This has been due to a combination of factors, including improvements in the standards of landfilling, changes to the types of waste going to landfill (such as reducing the amount of biodegradable waste), and an increase in the amount of landfill gas being used for energy. Emissions of methane alone have reduced by 64 per cent over the period.
2011 results
Between 2010 and 2011 emissions from waste management fell by just over 3 per cent (0.6 MtCO₂e), reflecting a continuation of the same trend seen in recent years, due to the same reasons.
The breakdown of emissions by gas for selected years since 1990 is shown in Table 10 below. The trend over the period is shown in Figure 11.
Table 10: Waste management sector emissions by gas, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Carbon dioxide | 1.3 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | | Methane | 44.9 | 39.3 | 29.0 | 18.8 | 17.7 | 17.0 | 16.3 | 15.8 | | Nitrous oxide | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.3 | | F-gases | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | | Total | 47.4 | 41.4 | 30.8 | 20.4 | 19.2 | 18.5 | 17.9 | 17.3 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories. Industrial process
The industrial process sector was responsible for 2 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2011, with carbon dioxide being the most prominent gas. The main source of emissions is cement production, with other processes such as sinter and lime production also worth mentioning.
Context – 1990 to 2010
Between 1990 and 2010, there was a significant reduction in greenhouse gas emissions from the industrial process sector, with an overall decrease of around 79 per cent. This was most notably due to a large reduction in emissions from adipic acid production and halocarbon production between 1998 and 1999 (combined emissions of which are now almost zero), although there has been a general downward trend in emissions over the period.
2011 results
Between 2010 and 2011 emissions from the industrial process sector fell by around 13 per cent (1.5 MtCO$\_2$e). This was largely driven by a reduction in nitrous oxide emissions from nitric acid production, with abatement technology being installed at all three UK nitric acid production plants during the year.
The breakdown of emissions by gas for selected years since 1990 is shown in Table 11 below. The trend over the period is shown in Figure 12. Table 11: Industrial process sector emissions by gas, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |----------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Carbon dioxide | 16.6 | 15.2 | 15.0 | 14.8 | 14.0 | 9.2 | 9.9 | 9.5 | | Methane | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | | Nitrous oxide | 24.7 | 14.9 | 5.6 | 3.0 | 2.5 | 1.2 | 1.4 | 0.2 | | F-gases | 13.1 | 14.8 | 4.0 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.4 | | Total | 54.7 | 45.1 | 24.7 | 18.8 | 16.9 | 10.8 | 11.7 | 10.2 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
Figure 12: Greenhouse gas emissions from industrial processes, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)
Public sector
The public sector was responsible for just over 1 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2011, with carbon dioxide representing almost the entirety of these emissions.
Context – 1990 to 2010
Between 1990 and 2010, there was a general downward trend in greenhouse gas emissions from the public sector, with an overall decrease of around 36 per cent. This has been largely driven by a reduction in the use of oil in this sector.
2011 results
Between 2010 and 2011 emissions from the public sector fell by just over 15 per cent (1.3 MtCO₂e), largely due to a reduction in natural gas use. The breakdown of emissions by gas for selected years since 1990 is shown in Table 12 below. The trend over the period is shown in Figure 13.
**Table 12: Public sector emissions by gas, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)**
| Year | Carbon dioxide | Methane | Nitrous oxide | F-gases | Total | |------|----------------|---------|---------------|---------|-------| | 1990 | 13.0 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.00 | 13.1 | | 1995 | 12.7 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.00 | 12.8 | | 2000 | 11.5 | 0.02 | 0.02 | 0.00 | 11.5 | | 2005 | 11.0 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 11.1 | | 2008 | 9.3 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 9.4 | | 2009 | 8.2 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 8.3 | | 2010 | 8.4 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 8.4 | | 2011 | 7.1 | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.00 | 7.1 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
**Figure 13: Greenhouse gas emissions from the public sector, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)**
______________________________________________________________________
**Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF)**
The LULUCF sector acted as a net sink of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2011, dominated by carbon dioxide.
**Context – 1990 to 2010**
Between 1990 and 2010, the UK went from being a net source of LULUCF emissions to a net sink. This was largely due to changes in land use over the period. In general, land being converted to cropland is the dominant source of CO₂ emissions, and forest land which remains as forest land is the dominant sink. The downward trend in net emissions over the period has largely been driven by forest land, with an increasing uptake of CO₂ by trees as they reach maturity, in line with the historical planting pattern. There has also been some reduction in emissions since 1990 due to less intensive agricultural practices.
2011 results
Between 2010 and 2011, net emissions from the LULUCF sector increased slightly, by around 0.4 MtCO₂e, largely due to the fact that forest land which has until now acted as a sink has now passed maturity, resulting in a lower uptake of CO₂ by trees.
The breakdown of emissions and removals by gas for selected years since 1990 is shown in Table 13 below. The trend over the period is shown in Figure 14.
Table 13: LULUCF sector emissions by gas, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)
| Year | Carbon dioxide | Methane | Nitrous oxide | F-gases | Total | |------|----------------|---------|---------------|---------|-------| | 1990 | 3.1 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 4.0 | | 1995 | 2.4 | 0.0 | 0.9 | 0.0 | 3.3 | | 2000 | -0.4 | 0.0 | 0.8 | 0.0 | 0.4 | | 2005 | -3.4 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.0 | -2.6 | | 2008 | -4.5 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.0 | -3.8 | | 2009 | -4.5 | 0.0 | 0.7 | 0.0 | -3.8 | | 2010 | -4.3 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 0.0 | -3.7 | | 2011 | -3.9 | 0.0 | 0.6 | 0.0 | -3.3 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
Figure 14: Greenhouse gas emissions from the LULUCF sector, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e) Emissions from UK-based international aviation and shipping bunkers
Emissions from international aviation and shipping can be estimated from refuelling from bunkers at UK airports and ports, whether by UK or non-UK operators. Under the reporting guidelines agreed by the UNFCCC, these emissions are not included in the UK’s emissions total, but are reported as memo items in national greenhouse gas inventories. Parties to the UNFCCC are required to act to limit or reduce emissions from international services working through the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and International Maritime Organisation (IMO).
In 2011, emissions from international aviation fuel use were estimated to be 33.2 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent. This was 4.3 per cent higher than the 2010 figure of 31.8 million tonnes. Between 1990 and 2006, these emissions increased by around 130 per cent, although since 2006 they have been steadily falling until 2011. In 2011 these emissions are still more than double the 1990 level. High altitude aviation also has a greenhouse effect over and above that of carbon dioxide alone, but this is not reflected in these estimates.
In 2011, emissions from UK international shipping bunkers were estimated to be 9.7 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent. This was 12.2 per cent higher than the 2010 figure of 8.6 million tonnes. Since 1990, emissions from UK shipping bunkers have been highly variable. There was an increase of around 18 per cent between 1990 and 1998, followed by a fall of 48 per cent between 1998 and 2002. Emissions then almost doubled between 2002 and 2006, but have since been very variable year on year, and there is no clear trend. The level of these emissions is now around 10 per cent higher than it was in 1990. It should be noted that UK operators purchase most of their fuel outside the UK.
Table 14 and Figure 15 below show the international aviation and shipping emissions series from 1990 to 2011.
Table 14: Greenhouse gas emissions from UK-based international aviation and shipping bunkers, 1990-2011 (MtCO₂e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | International aviation | 15.8 | 20.3 | 30.5 | 35.4 | 35.1 | 33.1 | 31.8 | 33.2 | | International shipping | 8.8 | 8.2 | 6.7 | 7.8 | 10.8 | 10.2 | 8.6 | 9.7 | | Total | 24.5 | 28.5 | 37.2 | 43.2 | 45.9 | 43.3 | 40.5 | 42.9 | Revisions from provisional estimates
Provisional estimates of 2011 UK greenhouse gas and carbon dioxide emissions were published in March 2012, based on early estimates of energy consumption for the year. Differences between the provisional and final estimates arise primarily due to revisions to other statistics on which these estimates were based, and methodological changes arising from developments to the inventory. Together these factors combine to give an uncertainty range in the provisional estimates of around +/-1½ per cent.
At that time, it was provisionally estimated that total UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2011 would be 549.3 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent, which represented a decrease of 7 per cent from the 2010 figure. Although the final 2011 figure of 552.6 million tonnes is around half a per cent higher than the provisional estimate, this still represents a decrease from 2010 to 2011 of around 7 per cent. This difference is due to revisions in the historical data series. Importantly, the same year-on-year trend as anticipated by the provisional estimates has now been seen in the final figures.
Similarly, it was provisionally estimated that net UK carbon dioxide emissions would be 456.3 million tonnes, representing a decrease of around 8 per cent from the 2010 figure. The final 2011 figure of 458.6 million tonnes is also around half a per cent higher than the provisional estimate; however, this does actually represent a decrease from 2010 to 2011 of around 8 per cent. Table 15 below shows the difference between the provisional estimates and the final estimates for 2011, alongside the equivalent figures for 2010. The breakdown by sector shown in the table is for carbon dioxide emissions only.
**Table 15: Comparison of 2011 provisional and final estimates**
| Sector | Provisional estimates (MtCO₂e) | Final estimates (MtCO₂e) | Change | % change | Change | % change | |-------------------------|--------------------------------|--------------------------|--------|----------|--------|----------| | | 2010 | 2011 | | | 2010 | 2011 | | | | Energy Supply | 195.7 | 183.8 | -11.9 | -6.1% | 195.3 | 182.2 | -13.2 | -6.7% | | Transport | 120.6 | 118.9 | -1.7 | -1.4% | 119.1 | 117.4 | -1.7 | -1.4% | | Business | 75.6 | 69.6 | -6.0 | -7.9% | 78.5 | 75.6 | -2.9 | -3.7% | | Residential | 86.5 | 67.5 | -19.0 | -22.0% | 86.5 | 66.4 | -20.2 | -23.3% | | Agriculture | 4.1 | 4.1 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 4.1 | 4.2 | 0.1 | 1.3% | | Waste Management | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.0 | 0.0% | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.0 | -2.5% | | Industrial Process | 9.0 | 8.7 | -0.3 | -3.3% | 9.9 | 9.5 | -0.4 | -4.1% | | Public | 8.4 | 7.9 | -0.5 | -6.0% | 8.4 | 7.1 | -1.3 | -15.2% | | LULUCF | -4.5 | -4.5 | 0.0 | 0.0% | -4.3 | -3.9 | 0.4 | -8.8% | | Total CO₂ | 495.8 | 456.3 | -39.5 | -8.0% | 497.8 | 458.6 | -39.2 | -7.9% | | Other greenhouse gases | 92.0 | 90.4 | -1.6 | -1.7% | 93.9 | 92.1 | -1.8 | -1.9% | | Kyoto greenhouse gas basket | 590.4 | 549.3 | -41.1 | -7.0% | 594.0 | 552.6 | -41.4 | -7.0% |
All figures for CO₂ are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
Most of the difference between the provisional and final estimates is due to developments which have been made to the UK greenhouse gas inventory since the previous estimates were published. These developments are needed to address both UNFCCC requirements and UK Government policy needs. Further details are provided in the following section.
**Revisions to the Inventory**
The UK Greenhouse Gas Inventory is reviewed every year, and the whole historical data series is revised to incorporate methodological improvements and new data. This takes into account revisions to the datasets which have been used in its compilation, most notably the UK energy statistics published in the Digest of UK Energy Statistics (DUKES). It is therefore not appropriate to compare the Inventory from one year with that from another. However, the latest Inventory represents a single consistent data series going back to 1990, and this therefore allows year-on-year comparisons to be made.
In preparing the 2011 Inventory, the most notable changes to the historical series since the 2010 Inventory was published are linked to new data and research which have become available in relation to a number of specific sectors. The impact of these, by sector, is shown in Table 16 below.
**Table 16: Revisions in the 2011 inventory, by sector (MtCO₂e)**
| Sector | 1990 emissions | 2010 emissions | Change | 2010 emissions | 2011 emissions | Change | |-------------------------|----------------|----------------|--------|----------------|----------------|--------| | | 2010 inventory | 2011 inventory | | 2010 inventory | 2011 inventory | | | Energy Supply | 273.4 | 272.4 | -1.0 | 204.3 | 204.3 | -0.1 | | Transport | 121.5 | 121.5 | 0.0 | 121.9 | 120.1 | -1.8 | | Business | 113.2 | 115.3 | 2.1 | 89.0 | 91.9 | 2.9 | | Residential | 80.8 | 80.8 | 0.0 | 89.9 | 89.9 | 0.0 | | Agriculture | 63.1 | 63.7 | 0.6 | 50.7 | 51.2 | 0.5 | | Waste Management | 45.9 | 47.4 | 1.5 | 16.5 | 17.9 | 1.3 | | Industrial Process | 54.4 | 54.7 | 0.2 | 10.9 | 11.7 | 0.9 | | Public | 13.1 | 13.1 | 0.0 | 8.5 | 8.4 | 0.0 | | LULUCF | 3.9 | 4.0 | 0.1 | -3.8 | -3.7 | 0.2 | | Total | 769.4 | 772.9 | 3.6 | 587.8 | 591.7 | 3.9 |
All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
Details of the most notable revisions are as follows.
Estimates of carbon dioxide emissions from industrial combustion, within the business sector, were revised in respect of the use other petroleum gas at UK petrochemical plants. The 2012 UNFCCC review of the UK inventory concluded that our emissions estimates in the chemical category were underestimated across the whole time series from 1990 onwards, due to emissions estimates having only been included for some, but not all, UK petrochemical plants. These emissions estimates are now higher than previously estimated across the entire time series.
Estimates of carbon dioxide emissions from road transport have been revised to reflect new data now available for vehicle kilometres travelled on minor roads, together with other changes to the underlying petrol and diesel consumption data from the Digest of UK Energy Statistics (DUKES). These emissions are now lower than previously estimated for all years from 2000 onwards.
Finally, there were revisions to the estimates of methane emissions from industrial waste-water handling, within the waste management sector. The 2012 UNFCCC review of the UK inventory concluded that our emissions estimates in this category were underestimated across the whole time series from 1990 onwards, due to a lack of transparency around whether emissions had been adequately reported. Our emissions estimates for this source have now been revised upwards across the entire time series. All the revisions to the UK inventory have resulted in revisions to the figures, for all years up to and including 2010. The total of all UK greenhouse gas emissions reported for the Kyoto Protocol in 2010 has been revised upwards from 590.4 to 594.0 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent. Comparing the 2011 figures with the 2010 figures published a year ago will therefore give a different year-on-year percentage change, but one which is incorrect and which should not be used.
**UK emissions reduction targets**
The UK has both international and domestic targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
These can be summarised as follows:
**Kyoto Protocol target**
The Kyoto Protocol uses a base year which is comprised of 1990 for carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, and 1995 for fluorinated compounds. To meet its commitment under the Protocol, the UK has agreed a legally binding target to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 12.5 per cent below the base year level over the period 2008-2012.
In July 2007, on completion of the review of the UK Inventory, the UK’s Kyoto base year figure was set at 779.9 million tonnes CO$\_2$ equivalent, based on the 2006 UK Inventory submission. This means that to meet the UK’s Kyoto commitment, greenhouse gas emissions must be below 682.4 million tonnes CO$\_2$ equivalent on average per year over the first five year commitment period of the Protocol (2008-2012).
In accordance with this average yearly target, the Kyoto Protocol target for the UK was then set at 3,412 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent over the full five year period - this is now the UK’s Assigned Amount.
For more details of the UK’s Kyoto commitment, see the [UK Initial Report under the Kyoto Protocol](#).
**UK Climate Change Act**
This Act includes a legally binding target for the UK to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by at least 80 per cent below base year levels by 2050. It also establishes a system of binding five-year carbon budgets to set the trajectory towards these targets.
Like the Kyoto Protocol, the Act uses a base year which is comprised of 1990 for carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, and 1995 for fluorinated... compounds. However, this base year figure differs from that used for reporting against the Kyoto Protocol in that the baseline is revised each year to incorporate revisions made subsequent to the UK’s Kyoto Protocol assigned amount having been fixed.
The Government set the first three carbon budgets in May 2009, covering the periods 2008-12, 2013-17 and 2018-2022. The fourth carbon budget, covering the period 2023-27, was set in June 2011. The first of these budgets requires that total UK greenhouse gas emissions do not exceed 3,018 million tonnes CO₂ equivalent over the five-year period 2008-12, which is about 22 per cent below the base year level on average over the period. The fourth carbon budget was set so as to require a reduction in emissions of 50 per cent below base year levels over the period 2023-2027.
Table 17 below shows details of the first four carbon budgets.
**Table 17: Summary of UK Carbon Budgets, 2008-2027**
| | Base year (actual emissions) | Budget 1 2008-12 | Budget 2 2013-17 | Budget 3 2018-22 | Budget 4 2023-27 | |----------------------|------------------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------|-------------------| | Budget level (MtCO₂e)| 3018 | 2782 | 2544 | 1950 | | Equivalent average annual emissions (MtCO₂e) | 774.3 | 603.6 | 556.4 | 508.8 | 390.0 | | Percentage reduction below base year levels | 22% | 28% | 34% | 50% |
The levels of all four carbon budgets expressed as a percentage reduction have changed from the values which have been referred to previously. This is because the base year figure is not fixed, but is revised each year to incorporate revisions to the inventory.
Further details of how the Kyoto Protocol and Carbon Budget baseline emissions figures have been derived, can be found on the DECC website in the **Record of UK base year emissions** table. Emissions Trading
*Emissions trading results, including those from the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), are not published as National Statistics, and any results which incorporate emissions trading figures should therefore not be treated as National Statistics.*
Under the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol, three *flexible mechanisms* were established to provide for trading of national allowances and project-based credits by Governments and emitters. These are *International Emissions Trading*, the *Clean Development Mechanism* (CDM) and *Joint Implementation* (JI). International Emissions Trading allows Government-to-Government trading of Assigned Amount Units (AAUs) between developed (*Annex I*) countries. The CDM allows Annex I countries with a target under the Kyoto Protocol to fund carbon reduction projects in developing (*non-Annex I*) countries and earn carbon credits for the avoided emissions. JI allows Annex I countries to implement emissions reduction projects in other Annex I countries, generating carbon credits which can be used for compliance with targets by the investor country.
In reporting emissions reductions against all of its targets, the UK needs to take account of emissions trading through these flexible mechanisms. At the present time, the scope of the UK’s emissions trading does not extend beyond the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), although it should be noted that EU ETS participants may also use credits generated under CDM and JI projects, subject to certain limits, in order to comply with their obligations.
However, the Government will be able to include any units or credits generated through any of the Kyoto Protocol’s flexible mechanisms in its future assessment of the UK’s progress towards its emissions reduction targets.
The EU ETS operates as a *cap and trade* system, which means that, currently, any installation within the System in the EU is given an allocation of emissions allowances each year. If the installation’s actual emissions are above this initial allocation for the year in question, then the installation must either purchase allowances through the System, or bring forward some allowances from the following year’s allocation, so as to cover the deficit. Conversely, installations with a surplus of emissions compared with their cap are allowed to either sell allowances or carry them over into the following year’s allocation, thus providing a financial incentive to reduce emissions. As there is a finite limit of allowances in the System (i.e. the cap), any allowances purchased should come from installations which have reduced emissions.
The System is now in the first year of Phase III, which will cover the eight year period 2013-2020. Phase III has seen changes to some of the parameters of the system, but there has been no change to the ultimate cap and trade basis of the EU ETS. Final results are currently available for each year of Phase I, which covered the three year period 2005-2007, and also for the first four years (2008-2011) of Phase II, which covers the period 2008-2012. In 2011, for the third consecutive year, the UK has been a net seller of allowances. This effectively means that installations between them either sold or carried over more emissions allowances than they purchased or brought forward. Taking emissions trading into account within the context of the UK’s reported emissions, this will affect the results by increasing the level of emissions by the amount of EU ETS allowances sold in the year.
It should be noted that at the end of Phase I, the UK Government sold a small number of unallocated allowances from the new entrant reserve on the open market. Since it would not have been appropriate to incorporate these sales in the 2007 results alone, they were spread equally over each of the three years in Phase I.
Table 18 below shows the UK’s net trading position in each year since the System commenced in 2005. For example, in 2011 the UK sold allowances totalling 25.0 MtCO$\_2$e, which should be taken into account when reporting emissions against the Kyoto Protocol target.
**Table 18: EU ETS net trading position, 2005-2011 (MtCO$\_2$e)**
| | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Net purchases/(sales) by UK installations | 27.1 | 33.2 | 27.5 | 19.9 | (13.7) | (7.7) | (25.0) | | Net purchases/(sales) by UK Government | (1.9) | (1.9) | (1.9) | - | - | - | - | | Net UK purchases/(sales) | 25.2 | 31.3 | 25.6 | 19.9 | (13.7) | (7.7) | (25.0) |
It should be noted that, for the purposes of reporting for UK Carbon Budgets under the Climate Change Act, the figure for net UK purchases/(sales) in 2011 will be slightly lower, at 24.9 MtCO$\_2$e. This is due to differences in both the coverage of the Act and the way in which the annual cap in 2011 has been calculated.
Further details of progress towards the UK carbon budgets will be included in the annual statement of emissions, required under section 16 of the Climate Change Act. In respect of 2011, this must be laid before Parliament no later than 31st March 2013.
The statement will provide a clear and thorough explanation of how the Net UK carbon account – which is what we use to determine compliance with the carbon budgets – was calculated, and what it amounts to. It will contain details of UK emissions and removals on a carbon budgets (i.e. UK only) basis, and the details of where carbon units have been used, in accordance with the methodologies contained in the Carbon Accounting Regulations 2009 and Carbon Accounting (Amendment) Regulations 2009. UK performance against emissions reduction targets
Performance measured against targets, incorporating the net EU ETS trading position, can be summarised as follows:
- UK emissions of the basket of six greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol were 25.9 per cent lower in 2011 than in the base year, down from 779.9 to 577.6 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent.
- For the purposes of carbon budgets reporting, UK greenhouse gas emissions were also 25.9 per cent lower in 2011 than in the base year, down from 774.3 to 574.1 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent.
These results are shown in the context of the headline results in Table 19 and Figure 16 below. A more detailed summary of the results can also be found in Table 22 at the end of this release.
Table 19: Performance against emissions reduction targets
| | Base year emissions (MtCO₂e) | 2011 Emissions (MtCO₂e) | Change from base year | |--------------------------------|------------------------------|-------------------------|-----------------------| | All greenhouse gases – Kyoto Protocol coverage (UK, Crown Dependencies & Overseas Territories) | Actual emissions (no allowance for trading) | 779.9 | 552.6 | -29.2% | | | Emissions with allowance for trading | 779.9 | 577.6 | -25.9% | | All greenhouse gases – UK Carbon Budgets coverage (UK only) | Actual emissions (no allowance for trading) | 774.3 | 549.2 | -29.1% | | | Emissions with allowance for trading | 774.3 | 574.1 | -25.9% | Estimating emissions on a temperature adjusted basis
Since April 2012, DECC have published estimates of emissions on a quarterly basis which incorporate an assessment of the impact of external temperatures on emissions of carbon dioxide. The quarterly emissions series is based on quarterly energy data published by DECC, and is not as accurate as the estimates in this statistical release, which are derived from our annual greenhouse gas inventory. However, the quarterly estimates do enable us to monitor recent trends on a more frequent basis.
The most recent quarterly estimates, published in January 2013, covered emissions up to and including the third quarter of 2012. This publication therefore included estimates of emissions for the 2011 calendar year, alongside equivalent estimates on a temperature adjusted basis, both of which we can compare with the final estimates now available.
Based on the latest quarterly estimates, net emissions of carbon dioxide were estimated at 495.8 Mt in 2010 and 457.1 Mt in 2011, representing a fall in emissions of 38.7 Mt between the two years. These figures compare with the final estimates of 497.8 Mt and 458.6 Mt respectively, suggesting that the quarterly estimates are a fairly good indicator of actual emissions.
On a temperature adjusted basis, net CO₂ emissions in 2010 and 2011 were estimated to be 477.9 Mt and 474.7 Mt respectively. This represents a much smaller reduction in emissions, of around 3.2 Mt. This would suggest that external temperatures made a significant contribution to the emissions reductions seen in 2011.
These results are shown in Table 20 below.
**Table 20: Comparison of quarterly emissions estimates with final emissions estimates**
| | 2010 CO₂ emissions (Mt) | 2011 CO₂ emissions (Mt) | Absolute change (Mt) | Percentage change | |--------------------------|--------------------------|--------------------------|----------------------|-------------------| | Final estimates | | | | | | – actual emissions | 497.8 | 458.6 | -39.2 | -7.9% | | Quarterly estimates | | | | | | – actual emissions | 495.8 | 457.1 | -38.7 | -7.8% | | Quarterly estimates | | | | | | – temperature adjusted emissions | 477.9 | 474.7 | -3.2 | -0.7% |
**Future updates to emissions estimates**
On Thursday 28th March 2013 we will be publishing a breakdown of 2011 UK emissions by end-user sector and fuel type, to supplement the source sector breakdown published today.
On the same date we will also be publishing provisional estimates of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2012 as National Statistics. This will coincide with the publication of *Energy Trends*, which will include the first estimates of 2012 UK energy consumption.
**Further information and feedback**
Any enquiries or comments in relation to this statistical release should be sent to DECC’s UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions Statistics and Inventory Team at the following address:
**ClimateChange.Statistics@decc.gsi.gov.uk**
Contact telephone: 0300 068 6563
The lead statistician for this publication is John Mackintosh.
Further information on UK greenhouse gas emissions statistics, including Excel downloads of all the data used to compile this statistical release, can be found on the Gov.uk website at:
**https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-energy-climate-change/series/uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions** Notes for Editors
01. A full set of data tables can be accessed via the UK greenhouse gas emissions pages of the Gov.uk website.
02. This Statistical Release and the related data tables are the first release of data from the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (NAEI) for 1970-2011, produced for DECC and the Devolved Administrations by Ricardo-AEA. Additional results will be released as they become available, including a full report to be published later in the year. For further information on the UK Greenhouse Gas Inventory, see the NAEI web site.
03. Further information about the Kyoto Protocol can be found on the UNFCCC’s website.
04. Results from the EU ETS are not currently published as National Statistics. They have therefore not been incorporated in the headline results. Further details of the European Union Emissions Trading System can be found at the EU ETS section of the Gov.uk website.
05. There are uncertainties associated with all estimates of greenhouse gas emissions. Although for any given year considerable uncertainties may surround the emissions estimates for a pollutant, it is important to note that trends over time are likely to be much more reliable. For more information on these uncertainties see the page on the UK greenhouse gas inventory on the Gov.uk website.
06. Under the Climate Change Act, the annual statement of emissions for 2011 must be laid before Parliament and published no later than 31st March 2013. This will give details of the net UK carbon account for 2011, which is used to determine compliance with the targets and budgets under the Act.
07. The latest UK energy statistics, including revisions to earlier years’ data, can be found in the 2012 Digest of UK Energy Statistics.
08. Detailed UK temperature data can be found on both the Met Office website and the Energy Statistics section of the Gov.uk website.
09. When emissions are measured on this basis, UK emissions account for around 2 per cent of the global total, based on a range of estimates produced by the UN, the IEA, the World Resources Institute and the EIA, amongst others.
10. Similar results for non-greenhouse gas atmospheric pollutants, covering the period 1970-2011, were published by Defra in December 2012. A National Statistics publication
National Statistics are produced to high professional standards set out in the National Statistics Code of Practice. They undergo regular quality assurance reviews to ensure they meet customer needs. Table 21: UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1990-2011, headline results
Greenhouse gas emissions: actual emissions in tonnes
| | Units (tonnes) | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |----------------------|---------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| | Net CO₂ emissions | Million | 592.0 | 553.8 | 553.1 | 564.3 | 547.5 | 557.6 | 558.2 | 554.1 | 552.7 | 543.6 | 531.2 | 480.7 | 497.8 | 458.6 | | (emissions minus | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | removals) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Methane (CH₄) | Million | 4.7 | 4.0 | 3.1 | 2.8 | 2.7 | 2.5 | 2.4 | 2.3 | 2.3 | 2.2 | 2.1 | 2.1 | 2.0 | 2.0 | | Nitrous Oxide (N₂O) | Million | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | 0.1 | | Hydrofluorocarbons | Thousand | 0.98 | 2.23 | 4.71 | 5.35 | 5.83 | 6.55 | 6.84 | 7.37 | 7.77 | 7.98 | 8.35 | 8.49 | 8.61 | 8.73 | | (HFC) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Perfluorocarbons | Thousand | 0.20 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.02 | 0.03 | 0.05 | | | (PFC) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Sulphur hexafluoride | Thousand | 0.04 | 0.05 | 0.08 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.04 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | 0.03 | | (SF₆) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Greenhouse gas emissions: weighted by global warming potential (million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |----------------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| | Net CO₂ emissions | Million | 592.0 | 553.8 | 553.1 | 564.3 | 547.5 | 557.6 | 558.2 | 554.1 | 552.7 | 543.6 | 531.2 | 480.7 | 497.8 | 458.6 | | (emissions minus | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | removals) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Methane (CH₄) | Million | 98.9 | 85.0 | 64.8 | 59.1 | 56.1 | 52.1 | 50.5 | 48.3 | 47.3 | 46.2 | 44.8 | 43.5 | 42.8 | 41.9 | | Nitrous Oxide (N₂O) | Million | 68.2 | 58.0 | 46.4 | 43.7 | 42.0 | 41.5 | 42.1 | 41.2 | 39.0 | 38.3 | 37.3 | 35.3 | 35.9 | 34.7 | | Hydrofluorocarbons | Thousand | 11.4 | 15.3 | 9.3 | 10.2 | 10.7 | 11.9 | 11.1 | 12.0 | 12.7 | 13.0 | 13.6 | 14.0 | 14.3 | 14.6 | | (HFC) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Perfluorocarbons | Thousand | 1.4 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.2 | 0.3 | | | (PFC) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Sulphur hexafluoride | Thousand | 1.0 | 1.2 | 1.8 | 1.4 | 1.5 | 1.3 | 1.1 | 1.1 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.6 | | (SF₆) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Kyoto greenhouse gas | 769.7 | 711.0 | 675.2 | 678.9 | 658.6 | 665.5 | 665.2 | 659.0 | 655.0 | 644.7 | 630.5 | 576.8 | 594.0 | 552.6 | | basket | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Notes
1. Figures for each individual gas include the Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry sector (LULUCF), but exclude emissions from UK Overseas Territories.
2. Kyoto basket total differs slightly from sum of individual pollutants above as the basket uses a narrower definition for LULUCF, and includes emissions from UK Overseas Territories, as well as emissions from direct flights between the UK and these Territories.
3. The entire time series is revised each year to take account of methodological improvements in the UK emissions inventory.
4. Emissions are presented as carbon dioxide equivalent in line with international reporting and carbon trading. To convert carbon dioxide into carbon equivalents, divide figures by 44/12.
5. Figures shown do not include any adjustment for the effect of the EU Emissions Trading System (EUETS), which was introduced in 2005.
6. Carbon dioxide emissions are reported as net emissions, to include removals from the atmosphere by carbon sinks. This also affects some of the other greenhouse gases, but to a lesser extent. Table 22: UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1990-2011, progress towards the Kyoto Protocol and Carbon Budgets Targets
| Kyoto Protocol greenhouse gas target | Baseline | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | |-------------------------------------|----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | No allowance for emission trading | | | | | | | | | | | | | All greenhouse gases (including net emissions/removals from LULUCF) | 779.9 | 769.7| 711.0| 675.2| 659.0| 655.0| 644.7| 630.5| 576.8| 594.0| 552.6| | Percentage change from baseline | | | | | | | | | | | | | EU ETS | | | | | | | | | | | | | Net purchases/(sales) by UK | | | | | | | | | | | | | installations | | | | | | | | | | | | | Net purchases/(sales) by UK | | | | | | | | | | | | | Government | | | | | | | | | | | | | Net UK purchases/(sales) | | | | | | | | | | | | | With allowance for emissions | | | | | | | | | | | | | trading | | | | | | | | | | | | | All greenhouse gases (including net emissions/removals from LULUCF) | 779.9 | 769.7| 711.0| 675.2| 633.8| 623.7| 619.1| 610.6| 590.5| 601.7| 577.6| | Percentage change from baseline | | | | | | | | | | | | | United Kingdom Carbon Budgets | | | | | | | | | | | | | No allowance for emission trading | | | | | | | | | | | | | All greenhouse gases (including net emissions/removals from LULUCF) | 774.3 | | | | | | | | | | | | Percentage change from baseline | | | | | | | | | | | | | EU ETS | | | | | | | | | | | | | Net purchases/(sales) by UK | | | | | | | | | | | | | installations | | | | | | | | | | | | | Net purchases/(sales) by UK | | | | | | | | | | | | | Government | | | | | | | | | | | | | Net UK purchases/(sales) | | | | | | | | | | | | | With allowance for emissions | | | | | | | | | | | | | trading | | | | | | | | | | | | | All greenhouse gases (including net emissions/removals from LULUCF) | 774.3 | | | | | | | | | | | | Percentage change from baseline | | | | | | | | | | | |
Notes
1. Kyoto base year consists of emissions of CO₂, CH₄ and N₂O in 1990, and of HFCs, PFCs and SF₆ in 1995. Includes an allowance for net emissions from LULUCF in 1990.
2. Emissions are presented as carbon dioxide equivalent in line with international reporting and carbon trading. To convert carbon dioxide into carbon equivalent, divide figures by 44/12.
3. UK Carbon Budgets were introduced in 2008. Figures include emissions solely from the UK and exclude emissions from Crown Dependencies and UK Overseas Territories. Figures include the Land Use, Land-Use Change and Forestry sector (LULUCF).
4. The Kyoto Protocol target includes emissions from the UK, Crown Dependencies and UK Overseas Territories. The target uses a narrower definition for the LULUCF sector.
5. The entire time series is revised each year to take account of methodological improvements in the UK emissions Inventory. However, the baseline used for the Kyoto Protocol is fixed and therefore does not change when methodological changes are made to the Inventory.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0191-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 34,
"total-input-tokens": 96368,
"total-output-tokens": 22797,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
2147,
1
],
[
2147,
3553,
2
],
[
3553,
5471,
3
],
[
5471,
6774,
4
],
[
6774,
9433,
5
],
[
9433,
11037,
6
],
[
11037,
12464,
7
],
[
12464,
14725,
8
],
[
14725,
16210,
9
],
[
16210,
18132,
10
],
[
18132,
19826,
11
],
[
19826,
22159,
12
],
[
22159,
23590,
13
],
[
23590,
25018,
14
],
[
25018,
26569,
15
],
[
26569,
27798,
16
],
[
27798,
29181,
17
],
[
29181,
30836,
18
],
[
30836,
32429,
19
],
[
32429,
34906,
20
],
[
34906,
36425,
21
],
[
36425,
39479,
22
],
[
39479,
42744,
23
],
[
42744,
44936,
24
],
[
44936,
46881,
25
],
[
46881,
49987,
26
],
[
49987,
52564,
27
],
[
52564,
54132,
28
],
[
54132,
55627,
29
],
[
55627,
58015,
30
],
[
58015,
60262,
31
],
[
60262,
60497,
32
],
[
60497,
66033,
33
],
[
66033,
70809,
34
]
]
} |
03b0e9792f1121ad7756205c0e95488ebab3ed22 | 2013 UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Provisional Figures and 2012 UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Final Figures by Fuel Type and End-User
Statistical release
27th March 2014
## Contents
Executive summary .................................................................................................................. 4 Coverage of emissions reporting ............................................................................................ 8 2013 Provisional Emissions ..................................................................................................... 9 Energy supply ....................................................................................................................... 13 Transport ............................................................................................................................. 15 Residential .......................................................................................................................... 15 Business .............................................................................................................................. 15 Industrial Process ............................................................................................................... 16 Public Sector ....................................................................................................................... 16 Agriculture, waste management and land use, land use change and forestry .................. 16 Carbon dioxide emissions by fuel type .............................................................................. 17 2012 Greenhouse Gas emissions by end-user ......................................................................... 19 Transport ............................................................................................................................. 23 Business .............................................................................................................................. 24 Residential .......................................................................................................................... 26 Agriculture .......................................................................................................................... 28 Waste management ............................................................................................................ 29 Industrial process ............................................................................................................... 31 Public sector ....................................................................................................................... 32 Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) ....................................................... 34 Exports ................................................................................................................................. 35 Revisions to the estimates of end-user emissions ............................................................... 37 Embedded Emissions .......................................................................................................... 37 Uncertainties around the 2012 estimates .............................................................................. 39 UK performance against emissions reduction targets ............................................................ 41 Future updates to emissions estimates .................................................................................. 42 Further information and feedback ......................................................................................... 42 Notes for editors ..................................................................................................................... 43 Executive summary
- This publication provides the latest provisional estimates of 2013 UK greenhouse gas emissions by source, and final estimates of 2012 UK greenhouse gas emissions by fuel type and end-user.
- In 2013, UK emissions of the basket of six greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol were provisionally estimated to be 569.9 million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO₂e). This was 1.9 per cent lower than the 2012 figure of 581.1 million tonnes.
- The largest decrease between 2012 emissions and provisional 2013 emissions was a 7.5 per cent (14.5MtCO₂e) decrease in the energy supply sector, due to a decrease in fossil fuel use for electricity generation.
- In 2013, UK net emissions of carbon dioxide were provisionally estimated to be 464.3 million tonnes (Mt). This was 2.1 per cent lower than the 2012 figure of 474.1Mt. Carbon dioxide (CO₂) is the main greenhouse gas, accounting for 82 per cent of total UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2012, the latest year for which final results are available.
- The sectoral breakdowns for provisional emissions are based on the source of the emissions. Emissions related to electricity generation are therefore attributed to power stations, the source of these emissions, rather than homes and businesses where electricity is used. For 1990-2012 emissions, an end-user breakdown is presented which reallocates emissions to where the “end-use” occurred. The main impact is to reallocate emissions from the energy supply sector to other sectors, the business and residential sectors in particular. Table 1: Emissions of greenhouse gases (MtCO$\_2$e)
| | 2012 | 2013(p) | Change | |--------------------------------|------|---------|--------| | Total greenhouse gas emissions | 581.1| 569.9 | -1.9% | | Carbon dioxide emissions | 474.1| 464.3 | -2.1% |
Note:
1. (p) 2013 estimates are provisional
2. Carbon dioxide emissions figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies. Total greenhouse gas emissions figures are for UK emissions under the Kyoto Protocol, which include some Overseas Territories and a narrower definition for the Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) sector.
3. Emissions are reported as net emissions, to include removals from the atmosphere by carbon sinks.
Figure 1: Emissions of greenhouse gases, 1990-2013 provisional, (MtCO$\_2$e)
Note: (p) 2013 estimates are provisional. Introduction
This publication provides provisional estimates of UK greenhouse gas emissions by source only for 2013, and final estimates of 2012 UK greenhouse gas emissions by end-user. It also includes uncertainty estimates for 2012 emissions by gas and sector.
Emissions by end user and by fuel type, and uncertainty data, are published in updated data tables alongside the final estimates for 2012 UK greenhouse gas emissions by source. Also published in this dataset are uncertainties analysis for 2012 emissions by gas and sector. Note that this publication does not discuss 2012 emissions by fuel type, but these are included in the updated data tables.
The estimates of 2012 UK greenhouse gas emissions by fuel type and end-user are based on, and consistent with, final estimates of 2012 UK greenhouse gas emissions by source which were published on 4th February 2014.
For the purposes of reporting, greenhouse gas emissions are allocated into sectors as follows:
- **Energy supply**
- Emissions from fuel combustion for electricity and other energy production sources.
- **Business**
- Emissions from combustion in industrial/commercial sectors, industrial off-road machinery and refrigeration and air conditioning.
- **Transport**
- Emissions from aviation, road transport, railways, shipping, fishing and aircraft support vehicles.
- **Public**
- Emissions from combustion of fuel in public sector buildings.
- **Residential**
- Emissions from fuel combustion for heating/cooking, garden machinery and fluorinated gases released from aerosols/metered dose inhalers.
- **Agriculture**
- Emissions from livestock, agricultural soils, stationary combustion sources and off-road machinery.
- **Industrial processes**
- Emissions from industry except for those associated with fuel combustion (for example, emissions from cement manufacture).
- **Land use land use change and forestry (LULUCF)**
- Emissions from forestland, cropland, grassland, settlements and harvested wood products. • Waste management. o Emissions from waste disposed of to landfill sites, waste incineration, and the treatment of waste water.
When emissions are reported by source, emissions are attributed to the sector that emits them directly. The end-user breakdown reallocates emissions by source into where the “end-use” occurred. The main impact is to reallocate emissions from the energy supply sector to other sectors, the business and residential sectors in particular.
These high-level sectors are made up of a number of more detailed sectors, which follow the definitions set out by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), and which are used in international reporting tables which are submitted to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) every year.
Provisional emissions are calculated based on the latest energy statistics to give an early indication of emissions estimates for 2013. Final emissions estimates for 2013 based on data from the UK’s National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory and the Digest of UK Energy Statistics for 2013 will be published in February 2015.
No temperature or seasonal adjustments are applied to data in this publication.
Note that all 2013 greenhouse gas emissions and energy statistics figures in this statistics release are provisional and subject to change. Coverage of emissions reporting
The basket of greenhouse gases covered by the Kyoto Protocol consists of six gases: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulphur hexafluoride. The last three gases are collectively referred to as fluorinated gases or F-gases. In accordance with international reporting and carbon trading protocols, each of these gases is weighted by its global warming potential (GWP), so that total greenhouse gas emissions can be reported on a consistent basis. The GWP for each gas is defined as its warming influence relative to that of carbon dioxide. Greenhouse gas emissions are then presented in carbon dioxide equivalent units.
Carbon dioxide (CO₂) is reported in terms of net emissions, which means total emissions from burning fuel minus total removals of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere by carbon sinks. Carbon sinks are incorporated within the Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) sector, which covers afforestation, reforestation, deforestation and forest management. They are defined by the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) as “any process, activity or mechanism which removes a greenhouse gas, an aerosol or a precursor of a greenhouse gas from the atmosphere”.
Unless otherwise stated, any figures included in this release represent emissions from within the UK and its Crown Dependencies (Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man) and are expressed in millions of tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO₂e).
Reporting of greenhouse gas emissions under the Kyoto Protocol is based on emissions in the UK, its Crown Dependencies, and those Overseas Territories (Bermuda, Cayman Islands, Falkland Islands, Gibraltar and Montserrat) that are party to the UK ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. This now includes emissions from all direct flights and shipping between the UK and these Territories. The Kyoto Protocol also uses a narrower definition of carbon sinks than that applied for domestic UK carbon dioxide reporting, which therefore results in a slightly different total. These adjustments mean that the greenhouse gas basket reported for Kyoto differs slightly from the sum of the individual gases as shown. 2013 Provisional Emissions
Provisional estimates of carbon dioxide emissions are produced based on provisional inland energy consumption statistics which are being published at the same time in DECC’s quarterly Energy Trends publication. Details of the provisional energy consumption statistics which have been used to estimate emissions can be found in Energy Trends.
Carbon dioxide accounts for the majority of UK greenhouse gas emissions (82 per cent in 2013). However, in order to give an indication of what the latest provisional carbon dioxide emissions estimates imply for the basket total, an estimate of emissions is produced of the remaining gases in the basket. This estimate is based on a simple approach which assumes that the trend for these gases will be half-way between no change on 2012 and a repeat of the trend indicated by the last 12 years’ data (2000-2012).
Finally, in order to establish an estimate of total emissions which is consistent with the Kyoto Protocol definition for the basket as a whole, a further adjustment is made in respect of emissions from Overseas Territories and the narrower definition of carbon sinks used by the Protocol.
These provisional emissions estimates will be subject to revision when the final estimates are published in February 2015; however, they provide an early indication of emissions in the most recent full calendar year. The majority of provisional estimates in the past have been within 2 per cent of the final figures.
To ensure consistency with other National Statistics publications on UK greenhouse gas emissions, the sectoral breakdowns in this statistical release are based on the UK’s National Communication sectors, by which we report our greenhouse gas emissions to the UNFCCC. In 2013, an estimated 38 per cent of carbon dioxide emissions were from the energy supply sector, 25 per cent from transport, 17 per cent from the residential sector and 16 per cent from business.
Between 2012 and 2013, provisional estimates indicate that carbon dioxide emissions decreased by 7.5 per cent (14.5Mt) in the energy supply sector driven by a decrease in fossil fuel use for electricity generation. Emissions increased by 2.9 per cent (2.1Mt) in the business sector and 2.6 per cent (2.0Mt) in the residential sector. Emissions from the transport sector were much the same as in 2012.
Since 1990, UK carbon dioxide emissions have decreased by around 21 per cent. This fall in emissions has coincided with a decrease in overall energy consumption over the period, of around 4 per cent. If this figure is adjusted to allow for the effect of temperature, energy consumption has fallen by around 9 per cent between 1990 and 2013. A number of factors explain this effect, such as changes in the efficiency in electricity generation and switching from coal to less carbon intensive fuels such as gas.
Table 2: Sources of carbon dioxide emissions 1990-2013 (provisional), (MtCO₂)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2012 | 2013(p) | |----------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|---------| | Energy Supply | 241.5 | 210.0 | 203.1 | 217.3 | 195.5 | 192.9 | 178.5 | | Transport | 119.6 | 119.9 | 124.9 | 129.2 | 119.1 | 116.9 | 116.7 | | Business | 113.7 | 107.3 | 108.2 | 97.6 | 77.2 | 73.3 | 75.4 | | Residential | 79.0 | 80.8 | 87.1 | 84.3 | 86.6 | 74.9 | 76.9 | | Other | 37.3 | 34.8 | 28.9 | 24.5 | 16.8 | 16.0 | 16.8 | | Total | 591.1 | 552.9 | 552.2 | 552.8 | 495.2 | 474.1 | 464.3 |
Note: (p) 2013 estimates are provisional. Figure 2: Carbon dioxide emissions by source, 1990-2013 (provisional), (MtCO₂)
Note: (p) 2013 estimates are provisional. Table 3: UK Greenhouse Gas Emissions 1990-2013, provisional headline results
Greenhouse gas emissions: weighted by global warming potential (million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 (p) | |----------------------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-----------| | Energy supply | 241.5 | 210.0 | 203.1 | 217.3 | 224.4 | 219.2 | 212.7 | 189.7 | 195.5 | 182.0 | 192.9 | 178.5 | | from power stations | 203.5 | 163.4 | 158.5 | 172.8 | 182.0 | 177.8 | 172.8 | 151.1 | 156.6 | 144.1 | 158.1 | 145.1 | | other Energy supply | 38.0 | 46.6 | 44.6 | 44.5 | 42.4 | 41.4 | 39.9 | 38.6 | 38.9 | 37.8 | 34.8 | 33.4 | | Business | 113.7 | 107.3 | 108.2 | 97.6 | 94.6 | 92.9 | 88.4 | 77.1 | 77.2 | 72.7 | 73.3 | 75.4 | | Transport | 119.6 | 119.9 | 124.9 | 129.2 | 129.7 | 132.7 | 125.5 | 120.7 | 119.1 | 117.4 | 116.9 | 116.7 | | Public | 13.1 | 12.7 | 11.5 | 11.0 | 10.0 | 9.3 | 9.9 | 9.7 | 10.5 | 9.7 | 10.1 | 10.4 | | Residential | 79.0 | 80.8 | 87.1 | 84.3 | 81.7 | 78.1 | 79.9 | 74.8 | 86.6 | 66.5 | 74.9 | 76.9 | | Agriculture | 5.2 | 5.3 | 4.8 | 4.6 | 4.3 | 4.1 | 4.1 | 4.0 | 4.1 | 4.2 | 4.1 | 4.1 | | Industrial process | 16.7 | 15.3 | 15.2 | 15.0 | 14.3 | 15.6 | 14.1 | 9.3 | 9.9 | 9.5 | 9.3 | 9.8 | | Waste Management | 1.3 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | | LULUCF | 1.0 | 0.6 | -3.0 | -6.5 | -7.0 | -7.4 | -7.6 | -7.7 | -8.0 | -8.2 | -7.7 | -7.7 | | Total CO₂ | 591.1 | 552.9 | 552.2 | 552.8 | 552.3 | 544.9 | 527.3 | 477.9 | 495.2 | 454.0 | 474.1 | 464.3 | | Other greenhouse gases| 187.8 | 173.7 | 137.6 | 117.7 | 114.9 | 112.3 | 110.5 | 106.4 | 104.6 | 102.7 | 101.3 | 99.9 | | Kyoto greenhouse gas basket | 777.6 | 725.2 | 692.2 | 676.3 | 673.2 | 663.7 | 644.2 | 590.7 | 606.2 | 563.2 | 581.1 | 569.9 |
Note:
1. (p) 2013 estimates are provisional.
2. Provisional 2013 CO₂ emissions for the agriculture, waste and LULUCF sectors have not been estimated; 2012 estimates have been used for this component of the provisional estimates of total UK emissions.
3. Kyoto basket total differs slightly from sum of individual pollutants above as the basket uses a narrower definition for LULUCF, and includes emissions from UK Overseas Territories, as well as emissions from direct flights between the UK and these Territories.
4. The entire time series is revised each year to take account of methodological improvements in the UK emissions inventory.
5. Emissions are presented as carbon dioxide equivalent in line with international reporting and carbon trading. To convert carbon dioxide into carbon equivalents, divide figures by 44/12.
6. Figures shown do not include any adjustment for the effect of the EU Emissions Trading System (EUETS), which was introduced in 2005.
7. Totals for CO₂ emissions and Energy Supply may not sum due to rounding. Energy supply
The energy supply sector was the largest contributor to the decrease in carbon dioxide emissions between 2012 and 2013. Emissions from this sector were provisionally estimated to be 178.5Mt in 2013, a decrease of around 7.5 per cent compared to 2012.
The decrease in emissions from this sector since 2012 can largely be attributed to an 8 per cent decrease in emissions from electricity generation. There was a change in the fuel mix used at power stations for electricity generation, with a 9 per cent decrease in coal use for generation and a 7 per cent decrease in gas use. In 2013, carbon dioxide emissions from power stations, at 145.1Mt, accounted for just under a third of all carbon dioxide emissions.
Carbon dioxide emissions from the energy supply sector were estimated to be around 26 per cent lower in 2013 than they were in 1990. Between 1990 and 2013, final consumption of electricity is provisionally estimated to have increased by around 11 per cent; domestic electricity consumption in particular was around 21 per cent higher in 2013 than in 1990. However, emissions from electricity generation have decreased by 29 per cent over the same period.
The decrease in emissions from power stations since 1990 has resulted from a combination of changes in the fuel mix over the period together with greater efficiency due to improvements in technology. It is difficult to assess the relative impacts of the two, but it is likely that the majority of the saving since 1990 will have been due to fuel switching from coal to gas for electricity generation.
Figure 3: Fuel mix for UK electricity generation, 1990-2013 (provisional), (MtOe)
Note: (p) 2013 estimates are provisional. Figure 4: Carbon dioxide emissions from electricity generation, 1990-2013 (provisional), (MtCO₂)
Note: (p) 2013 estimates are provisional.
Figure 5: Carbon dioxide emissions from power stations as a proportion of total carbon dioxide emissions, 1990-2013 (provisional), (MtCO₂)
Note: (p) 2013 estimates are provisional. Transport
In 2013, carbon dioxide emissions from the transport sector, at 117Mt, accounted for about a quarter of all carbon dioxide emissions. Between 2012 and 2013, transport emissions decreased by 0.2 per cent (0.2Mt).
Emissions from this sector are similar to 1990 levels (down 2 per cent, or 3Mt). There was a general increase in these emissions throughout the period up to 2007, but they have been decreasing since then.
It should be noted that these estimates do not include emissions from international aviation and shipping; domestic aviation and shipping, however, are included.
Residential
In 2013, the residential sector, with emissions of 77Mt, accounted for around 17 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions. Between 2012 and 2013 there was a 3 per cent increase in emissions from this sector.
The average temperature for 2013 was very similar to the average temperature for 2012, but the first quarter of 2013 was on average 2.7 degrees Celsius cooler than the first quarter of 2012 which has contributed to an increase in the use of natural gas for space heating.
In 2013, emissions from this sector were estimated around 3 per cent lower than in 1990.
It should be noted that emissions from this sector do not include emissions from power stations related to domestic electricity consumption, as these emissions are included in the energy supply sector.
Business
Carbon dioxide emissions from the business sector, at 75Mt, accounted for around 16 per cent of all carbon dioxide emissions in 2013. This was 3 per cent higher than in 2012, which is largely due to increased use of manufactured fuels in the iron and steel industry caused by the re-opening of Teesside Steelworks in April 2012 since when it has gradually increased operations, and the opening of a furnace at Port Talbot in February 2013.
There has been a 34 per cent decrease in business sector emissions since 1990. Industrial Process
In 2013, carbon dioxide emissions from the industrial process sector were estimated to be 10Mt, an increase of around 6 per cent compared with 2012. Between 1990 and 2013, emissions from this sector are estimated to have decreased by around 41 per cent.
Public Sector
Carbon dioxide emissions from the public sector, at 10Mt, were estimated to have increased by about 2 per cent from 2012 emissions. Between 1990 and 2013, emissions from this sector are estimated to have decreased by around 21 per cent.
Agriculture, waste management and land use, land use change and forestry
Updated emissions estimates for these sectors are not yet available for 2013, so for these provisional estimates of 2013 carbon dioxide emissions, emissions from these sectors are assumed to be the same as in 2012.
On this basis, 2013 carbon dioxide emissions from the agriculture sector are estimated to be 4Mt, 1Mt lower than in 1990. Carbon dioxide emissions from waste management were estimated to be 0.3Mt in 2013, and net land use, land use change and forestry emissions are estimated to be -8Mt in 2013 as the sector is currently a net carbon sink, with removals of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere being greater than emissions. Carbon dioxide emissions by fuel type
The amount of carbon dioxide released by the consumption of one unit of energy depends on the type of fuel consumed. For example, since coal has a higher carbon content than gas, more carbon dioxide emissions result from burning one unit of coal than from one unit of gas.
Emissions per unit of electricity supplied by major power producers from fossil fuels are estimated to have been 640 tonnes of carbon dioxide per GWh in 2013 overall; within this, emissions from electricity generated from coal (870 tonnes of carbon dioxide per GWh electricity supplied) were over two times higher than for electricity supplied by gas (330 tonnes of carbon dioxide per GWh). For all sources of electricity (including nuclear, renewables and autogeneration), the average amount of carbon dioxide emitted in 2013 amounted to 410 tonnes per GWh of electricity supplied.
In 2013, carbon dioxide emissions from the use of fossil fuels, including fuel used for generating electricity, were estimated at 457Mt. This was 2 per cent lower than the 2012 figure of 467Mt. The biggest change in emissions was from the use of coal, down 10Mt (8 per cent) from 131Mt in 2012 to 121Mt in 2013. This largely resulted from decreased use of coal for electricity generation at power stations.
Over the period 1990 to 2013, carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels decreased by 20 per cent. Over the same period, overall primary consumption of fossil fuels has dropped by nearly 10 per cent. The relatively higher decrease in emissions can be attributed to an increase in the use of gas accompanied by a decrease in the use of coal and other solid fuels; gas consumption as a proportion of all fossil fuels has increased from 26 per cent in 1990 to 41 per cent in 2013, whilst the proportion used of coal and other solid fuels has decreased from 34 per cent to 22 per cent over the same period. Oil use, as a proportion of all fossil fuels, has remained relatively stable over the period; this accounted for almost 40 per cent of all fossil fuels used in 1990 and 37 per cent in 2013.
Table 4: UK Carbon dioxide Emissions by fuel, 1990-2013 (provisional), (MtCO₂)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 (p) | |----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|----------| | Gas | 146.0| 188.2| 241.8| 235.2| 228.4| 193.5| 183.8| 184.5 | | Oil | 191.1| 178.6| 166.1| 170.0| 150.5| 144.0| 143.1| 141.7 | | Coal | 217.7| 151.4| 116.7| 124.7| 100.7| 101.3| 130.9| 120.5 | | Other solid fuels | 15.4 | 12.5 | 11.9 | 10.2 | 8.3 | 8.0 | 8.9 | 10.2 | | Non-fuel | 20.8 | 22.2 | 15.7 | 12.7 | 7.3 | 7.2 | 7.3 | 7.3 | | Total | 591.1| 552.9| 552.2| 552.8| 495.2| 454.0| 474.1| 464.3 |
Note: (p) 2013 estimates are provisional. Figure 6: Carbon dioxide emissions by fossil fuels, 1990-2013 (provisional), (MtCO₂)
Note: (p) 2013 estimates are provisional. These results are based on, and consistent with, the breakdown by gas and national communication sector of 2012 emissions by source which was published on 4th February 2014. Total 2012 greenhouse gas emissions for the UK and Crown Dependencies were 575.4Mt CO$\_2$e.
The end-user breakdown reallocates emissions by source to where the “end-use” occurred. The main impact is to reallocate emissions from the energy supply sector to flows of energy i.e. to other sectors, the business and residential sectors in particular. Amongst other things, this therefore reallocates emissions occurring at power stations in generating electricity to where the electricity is actually consumed. It should be noted that the results shown by this breakdown are based on a number of assumptions, and we would therefore expect them to be subject to a wider margin of error than the breakdown of emissions by source.
Figure 7: Allocation of 2012 greenhouse gas emissions from source sectors to end-user sectors (MtCO$\_2$e) Greenhouse gas emissions are reported here in two ways: by gas, and by the end-user sector of the emissions. Looking at the breakdown by end-user sector, in 2012 31 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions were from the business sector, 23 per cent from transport, 25 per cent from the residential sector and 10 per cent from agriculture. The remainder were attributable to waste management, industrial processes, the public sector, exports and LULUCF emissions.
Figure 8: Greenhouse gas emissions by end-user sector, 2012 (excluding LULUCF)
Table 5: Breakdown of 2012 UK greenhouse gas emissions by gas and end-user sector (MtCO$\_2$e)
| End-user Sector | Carbon dioxide | Methane | Nitrous oxide | Fluorinated gases | Total | |-----------------------|----------------|---------|---------------|-------------------|--------| | Transport | 131.8 | 0.6 | 1.2 | 0.0 | 133.6 | | Business | 161.3 | 2.9 | 1.6 | 12.4 | 178.2 | | Residential | 139.2 | 3.5 | 0.6 | 2.0 | 145.3 | | Agriculture | 6.6 | 22.3 | 30.3 | 0.0 | 59.1 | | Waste Management | 0.3 | 20.1 | 1.2 | 0.0 | 21.6 | | Industrial Process | 9.9 | 0.2 | 0.1 | 0.3 | 10.6 | | Public | 19.4 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 19.9 | | LULUCF | -7.7 | 0.1 | 0.7 | 0.0 | -7.0 | | Exports | 13.4 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 14.0 | | Total | 474.1 | 50.6 | 36.0 | 14.7 | 575.4 | Table 6: Breakdown of 2012 UK greenhouse gas emissions by gas and end-user sector % of total UK emissions, excluding LULUCF (MtCO$\_2$e)
| Sector | Carbon dioxide | Methane | Nitrous oxide | Fluorinated gases | Total | |-------------------|----------------|---------|---------------|-------------------|--------| | Transport | 22.9% | 0.1% | 0.2% | 0.0% | 23.2% | | Business | 28.0% | 0.5% | 0.3% | 2.2% | 31.0% | | Residential | 24.2% | 0.6% | 0.1% | 0.3% | 25.3% | | Agriculture | 1.1% | 3.9% | 5.3% | 0.0% | 10.3% | | Waste Management | 0.0% | 3.5% | 0.2% | 0.0% | 3.8% | | Industrial Process| 1.7% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.1% | 1.8% | | Public | 3.4% | 0.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 3.5% | | Exports | 2.3% | 0.1% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 2.4% | | Total | 82.4% | 8.8% | 6.3% | 2.6% | 100.0% |
Note: This Table does not include emissions from the LULUCF sector, since in 2012 this sector acted as a net sink, and emissions were therefore effectively negative. Sector values may sum to more than gas totals due to exclusion of LULUCF emissions.
A summary of the changes in the end-user breakdown for each gas between 2011 and 2012 can be found in Table 17 towards the end of this statistical release. This also shows a comparable summary of the breakdown of emissions by source, which was published in February 2014.
The data tables for full end-user breakdown by National Communications category, from 1990 to 2012, can be found on the Final Greenhouse Gas Emissions Statistics page of the Gov.uk website. These tables were originally published on 4th February 2014 showing emissions by source only, but were updated with the end-user and fuel type breakdowns on 27th March 2014. Table 7: Greenhouse gas emissions by end-user, 1990-2012 (MtCO$\_2$e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |----------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| | Transport| 139.4 | 143.1 | 146.6 | 149.6 | 136.9 | 134.9 | 133.6 | | Business | 248.5 | 215.5 | 215.4 | 210.5 | 181.4 | 171.6 | 178.2 | | Residential| 169.7 | 156.5 | 158.5 | 163.3 | 157.0 | 129.8 | 145.3 | | Agriculture| 74.9 | 73.2 | 69.5 | 64.7 | 60.1 | 59.7 | 59.1 | | Waste Management| 47.3 | 47.9 | 38.8 | 29.8 | 23.2 | 22.7 | 21.6 | | Industrial Process| 57.3 | 47.3 | 26.6 | 19.7 | 12.6 | 11.0 | 10.6 | | Public | 30.9 | 28.2 | 23.6 | 22.2 | 20.1 | 18.7 | 19.9 | | LULUCF | 1.9 | 1.5 | -2.1 | -5.7 | -7.3 | -7.5 | -7.0 | | Exports | 9.1 | 13.3 | 13.0 | 16.4 | 15.9 | 15.7 | 14.0 | | Total | 778.9 | 726.6 | 689.8 | 670.5 | 599.8 | 556.7 | 575.4 |
Note: All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
Figure 9: Greenhouse gas emissions by end-user, 1990-2012 (MtCO$\_2$e)
Details of changes over time for each sector are set out in the following sections of this statistical release. In each case, information about the trend between 1990 and 2011 provides some context, alongside details of the changes since 2011 now seen in the 2012 estimates. Transport
The transport sector was responsible for around 23 per cent of UK greenhouse gas end-user emissions in 2012, almost entirely through carbon dioxide emissions. Emissions of carbon dioxide are closely related to the amount of fuel used, whilst nitrous oxide and methane emissions are influenced more by the vehicle type and age.
2012 results
Between 2011 and 2012 there was very little change in end-user emissions from the transport sector. In both years, transport end-user emissions were around 16Mt higher than by source emissions.
Context – 1990 to 2011
Between 1990 and 2011, there was relatively little overall change in the level of greenhouse gas end-user emissions from the transport sector (emissions were around 3 per cent lower in 2011 than in 1990), although emissions actually increased slightly up to 2007 and then fell again from 2008 onwards. This is similar to the trend seen for by source emissions from the transport sector.
Road transport is the most significant source of emissions in this sector, in particular passenger cars, and the changes which have been seen over the period were heavily influenced by this category. Although there has been an increase in both the number of passenger vehicles and the vehicle kilometres travelled, emissions from passenger cars have decreased due to lower petrol consumption outweighing an increase in diesel consumption. However, this decrease has been partially offset by an increase in emissions from light duty vehicles.
Table 8: Transport sector end-user emissions by gas, 1990-2012 (MtCO₂e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Carbon dioxide | 136.2 | 139.6 | 143.8 | 147.5 | 135.3 | 133.1 | 131.8 | | Methane | 1.7 | 1.5 | 1.0 | 0.7 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.6 | | Nitrous oxide | 1.5 | 2.0 | 1.8 | 1.5 | 1.1 | 1.2 | 1.2 | | F-gases | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | | Total | 139.4 | 143.1 | 146.6 | 149.6 | 136.9 | 134.9 | 133.6 |
Note: All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories. Business
The business sector was responsible for 31 per cent of UK greenhouse gas end-user emissions in 2012, with carbon dioxide being the most prominent gas. Emissions from this sector primarily relate to fossil fuel combustion in industry and commerce, although emissions of F-gases from the use of fluorinated compounds in certain applications, particularly refrigeration and air-conditioning, are significant. The business sector is responsible for the majority of emissions from F-gases.
2012 results
Between 2011 and 2012 there was an increase in business sector end-user emissions of around 6.6MtCO$\_2$e (3.8 per cent). This was mostly due to an increase in emissions from electricity use.
Context – 1990 to 2011
Between 1990 and 2011, there was a general downward trend in greenhouse gas end-user emissions from the business sector, resulting in an overall decrease of around 31 per cent. This has been largely due to a reduction in emissions from industrial combustion (including iron and steel) meaning emissions of carbon dioxide have reduced over the period by 33 per cent. However, emissions from F-gases have increased significantly, mainly due to an increase in emissions from refrigeration and air-conditioning as between 1993 and 2002, hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) were used to replace other, ozone depleting (not shown in emissions data below), substances which were previously used as refrigerants. This increasing trend has since slowed, as tighter controls on emissions leakages have been introduced.
The overall downward trend for end-user emissions is similar to the trend for by source emissions, though end-user emissions are much higher due to the inclusion of emissions from electricity generation.
Table 9: Business sector end-user emissions by gas, 1990-2012 (MtCO₂e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |----------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------|-------| | Carbon dioxide | 232.1 | 201.7 | 201.8 | 195.1 | 164.8 | 154.9 | 161.3 | | Methane | 13.2 | 9.9 | 6.3 | 4.1 | 3.1 | 3.1 | 2.9 | | Nitrous oxide | 2.5 | 2.1 | 1.9 | 2.0 | 1.5 | 1.4 | 1.6 | | F-gases | 0.6 | 1.8 | 5.4 | 9.4 | 12.0 | 12.2 | 12.4 | | Total | 248.5 | 215.5 | 215.4 | 210.5 | 181.4 | 171.6 | 178.2 |
Note: All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
Figure 11: Greenhouse gas end-user emissions from business, 1990-2012 (MtCO₂e) Residential
The residential sector was responsible for around 25 per cent of UK greenhouse gas end-user emissions in 2012, with carbon dioxide being the most prominent gas for this sector.
It should be noted that, unlike emissions by source, which only cover activities related to residential fossil fuel use, emissions reported by end-user also include residential electricity use which have been re-allocated from the energy supply sector.
2012 results
Between 2011 and 2012 there was an increase of around 11.9 per cent (15.5MtCO$\_2$e) in end-user emissions from this sector, due to an increase in emissions from gas and electricity consumption. The increase in gas consumption was due to increased use of gas for space heating (as 2012 was a colder year on average than 2011), and was also seen in the by source emissions. However, the emissions from electricity use were included in the energy supply sector for the by source emissions.
Context – 1990 to 2011
Between 1990 and 2011, there was considerable variation in greenhouse gas end-user emissions from year to year in the residential sector. Both the end-user and by source emissions from this sector are heavily influenced by external temperatures. End-user emissions have seen a bigger overall decrease since 1990 than by source emissions, due to a decrease in emissions from electricity consumption which are included in the residential end-user emissions but are in the energy supply sector for the by source emissions.
Table 10: Residential sector end-user emissions by gas, 1990-2012 (MtCO$\_2$e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Carbon dioxide | 156.5 | 146.5 | 150.5 | 156.5 | 151.0 | 124.2 | 139.2 | | Methane | 12.2 | 8.9 | 5.5 | 4.0 | 3.6 | 3.1 | 3.5 | | Nitrous oxide | 1.0 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.6 | | F-gases | 0.0 | 0.4 | 1.8 | 2.2 | 1.9 | 1.9 | 2.0 | | Total | 169.7 | 156.5 | 158.5 | 163.3 | 157.0 | 129.8 | 145.3 |
Note: All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories. Figure 12: Greenhouse gas end-user emissions from the residential sector, 1990-2012 (MtCO$\_2$e) Agriculture
The agriculture sector was responsible for 10 per cent of UK greenhouse gas end-user emissions in 2012. Emissions of nitrous oxide (51 per cent) and methane (38 per cent) dominate this sector. End-user and by source emissions are very similar for this sector, with the most significant sources being emissions of methane due to enteric fermentation from livestock, particularly cattle, and nitrous oxide emissions related to the use of fertilisers on agricultural soils.
2012 results
Between 2011 and 2012 there was very little change in end-user emissions from the agriculture sector.
Context – 1990 to 2011
Between 1990 and 2011, greenhouse gas end-user emissions from agriculture decreased by around 20 per cent, due to a general downward trend since the late 1990s. This reduction was driven by a fall in animal numbers over the period, together with a decrease in synthetic fertiliser use. The same trend is seen for by source emissions from this sector.
Table 11: Agriculture sector end-user emissions by gas, 1990-2012 (MtCO₂e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Carbon dioxide | 8.7 | 8.3 | 7.3 | 7.2 | 6.6 | 6.5 | 6.6 | | Methane | 28.4 | 27.6 | 26.3 | 23.9 | 22.5 | 22.3 | 22.3 | | Nitrous oxide | 37.8 | 37.3 | 35.9 | 33.5 | 31.0 | 30.8 | 30.3 | | F-gases | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | | Total | 74.9 | 73.2 | 69.5 | 64.7 | 60.1 | 59.7 | 59.1 |
Note: All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories. Waste management
For the waste management sector, emissions measured by end-user are the same as those measured by source, since no emissions from the energy supply sector are reallocated to waste management. The waste management sector was responsible for around 4 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2012, with methane being by far the most prominent gas (93 per cent). The vast majority of these emissions are from landfill sites.
2012 results
Between 2011 and 2012, emissions from waste management fell by just under 5 per cent (1.1MtCO$\_2$e), reflecting a continuation of the trend seen in recent years of a decrease in emissions from landfill waste.
Context – 1990 to 2011
Between 1990 and 2011, greenhouse gas emissions from the waste management sector decreased by 52 per cent. This was due to a combination of factors, including improvements in the standards of landfilling, changes to the types of waste going to landfill (such as reducing the amount of biodegradable waste), and an increase in the amount of landfill gas being used for energy. Emissions of methane alone have reduced by 53 per cent over the period.
**Table 12: Waste management sector end-user emissions by gas, 1990-2012 (MtCO$\_2$e)**
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Carbon dioxide | 1.3 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.3 | | Methane | 44.8 | 45.8 | 36.9 | 28.2 | 21.7 | 21.2 | 20.1 | | Nitrous oxide | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.3 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.2 | 1.2 | | F-gases | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | | Total | 47.3 | 47.9 | 38.8 | 29.8 | 23.2 | 22.7 | 21.6 |
Note: All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
**Figure 14: Greenhouse gas end-user emissions from waste management, 1990-2012 (MtCO$\_2$e)** Industrial process
The industrial process sector was responsible for 2 per cent of UK greenhouse gas end-user emissions in 2012, with carbon dioxide being the most prominent gas. The main source of emissions is cement production, with other processes such as sinter and lime production also worth mentioning.
2012 results
Between 2011 and 2012, end-user emissions from the industrial process sector fell by around 4 per cent (0.5MtCO$\_2$e).
Context – 1990 to 2011
Between 1990 and 2011, there was a large reduction in greenhouse gas end-user emissions from the industrial process sector, with an overall decrease of around 81 per cent. This was most notably due to a large reduction in emissions from adipic acid production and halocarbon production between 1998 and 1999 (combined emissions of which are now almost zero), although there has been a general downward trend in emissions over the period. The end-user emissions are only slightly higher than by source emissions, and follow a very similar trend between 1990 and 2011.
Table 13: Industrial process sector end-user emissions by gas, 1990-2012 (MtCO$\_2$e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Carbon dioxide | 17.8 | 16.3 | 16.2 | 15.4 | 10.5 | 10.0 | 9.9 | | Methane | 1.6 | 1.3 | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.2 | | Nitrous oxide | 24.7 | 14.9 | 5.6 | 3.0 | 1.4 | 0.2 | 0.1 | | F-gases | 13.1 | 14.7 | 3.9 | 0.9 | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.3 | | Total | 57.3 | 47.3 | 26.6 | 19.7 | 12.6 | 11.0 | 10.6 |
Note: All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories. Public sector
The public sector was responsible for 3 per cent of UK greenhouse gas end-user emissions in 2012, with carbon dioxide making up almost all of these emissions.
2012 results
Between 2011 and 2012 end-user emissions from the public sector increased by 6.5 per cent (1.2MtCO$\_2$e). This is a bigger increase than was seen for by source emissions, due to increased emissions from electricity consumption.
Context – 1990 to 2011
Between 1990 and 2011, there was a general downward trend in greenhouse gas end-user emissions from the public sector, with an overall decrease of around 39 per cent. This has been largely driven by a reduction in the use of oil and coal in this sector. Public sector end-user emissions are roughly double by source emissions from the sector. Table 14: Public sector end-user emissions by gas, 1990-2012 (MtCO₂e)
| Year | Carbon dioxide | Methane | Nitrous oxide | F-gases | Total | |------|----------------|---------|---------------|---------|-------| | 1990 | 28.9 | 1.8 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 30.9 | | 1995 | 26.7 | 1.4 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 28.2 | | 2000 | 22.7 | 0.8 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 23.6 | | 2005 | 21.6 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 22.2 | | 2010 | 19.5 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 20.1 | | 2011 | 18.2 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 18.7 | | 2012 | 19.4 | 0.5 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 19.9 |
Note: All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories.
Figure 16: Greenhouse gas end-user emissions from the public sector, 1990-2012 (MtCO₂e) Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF)
For the LULUCF sector, emissions measured by end-user are the same as those measured by source, since no emissions from the energy supply sector are reallocated to LULUCF.
The LULUCF sector acted as a net sink of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2012, dominated by carbon dioxide. In general, land being converted to cropland is the dominant source of carbon dioxide emissions, and forest land which remains as forest land is the dominant sink.
2012 results
Between 2011 and 2012, net emissions from the LULUCF sector increased slightly, by around 0.5MtCO$\_2$e, largely due to increases in emissions from biomass burning.
Context – 1990 to 2011
Between 1990 and 2011, the UK went from being a net source of LULUCF emissions to a net sink. This was largely due to changes in land use over the period. The downward trend in net emissions over the period has largely been driven by land converted to cropland and forest land, with an increasing uptake of carbon dioxide by trees as they reach maturity, in line with the historical planting pattern. There has also been some reduction in emissions since 1990 due to less intensive agricultural practices.
Table 15: LULUCF sector end-user emissions by gas, 1990-2012 (MtCO$\_2$e)
| | 1990 | 1995 | 2000 | 2005 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | |----------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Carbon dioxide | 1.0 | 0.6 | -3.0 | -6.5 | -8.0 | -8.2 | -7.7 | | Methane | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.1 | | Nitrous oxide | 0.8 | 0.9 | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.7 | 0.7 | 0.7 | | F-gases | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | | Total | 1.9 | 1.5 | -2.1 | -5.7 | -7.3 | -7.5 | -7.0 |
Note: All figures are for the UK and Crown Dependencies only, and exclude Overseas Territories. Exports
The exports sector represents emissions associated with the production of fuels within the UK (for example, from a refinery or a coal mine) which are subsequently exported or sent to bunkers for use outside the UK. Since these fuels are ultimately used for activities which occur outside the UK, it would not be appropriate to allocate the emissions from their production to any of the National Communication sectors, so they are reported under a separate, additional sector.
The exports sector was responsible for around 2 per cent of UK greenhouse gas emissions in 2012, with carbon dioxide representing almost the entirety of these emissions.
2012 results
Between 2011 and 2012 emissions from the exports sector decreased by 1.7Mt (11 per cent).
Context – 1990 to 2011
Between 1990 and 2011, there was a general upward trend in greenhouse gas emissions from exports, with an overall increase of around 72 per cent. This has largely been driven by changes in throughput at refineries, which have fed through to increased exports rather than increased deliveries to the domestic market.
**Table 16: Exports sector emissions by gas, 1990-2011 (MtCO$\_2$e)**
| Year | Carbon dioxide | Methane | Nitrous oxide | F-gases | Total | |------|----------------|---------|---------------|---------|-------| | 1990 | 8.5 | 0.6 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 9.1 | | 1995 | 12.5 | 0.7 | 0.1 | 0.0 | 13.3 | | 2000 | 12.3 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 13.0 | | 2005 | 15.8 | 0.4 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 16.4 | | 2010 | 15.3 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 15.9 | | 2011 | 15.0 | 0.6 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 15.7 | | 2012 | 13.4 | 0.5 | 0.2 | 0.0 | 14.0 |
**Figure 18: Greenhouse gas end-user emissions from the exports sector, 1990-2012 (MtCO$\_2$e)** Revisions to the estimates of end-user emissions
It should be noted that the historical time series of emissions by end-user is revised each year to reflect any revisions made to either the estimates of emissions by source or the other energy consumption data used in the end-user emissions calculation. In this publication, this has resulted in revisions to some end-user emissions figures for all years up to and including 2011. Further details of these revisions can be found in the National Statistics release of 4th February 2014, which covered 2012 UK greenhouse gas emissions by source.
Embedded Emissions
End-user emissions do not take account of the emissions “embedded” within the manufactured goods and services which the UK imports and exports. Embedded emissions capture what is sometimes referred to as the UK’s “carbon footprint”. This calculation of emissions on a “consumption” basis, reporting on emissions embedded in goods and services across international borders, is considerably more challenging.
Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) provide the lead in this area. They publish annual statistics on the UK’s Carbon Footprint that investigates the impact the UK consumption has on carbon dioxide emissions. These are published in December of each year and are reported 23 months in arrears. Table 17: UK emissions of all greenhouse gases, carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, 2011-12, by source and end-user, National Communication categories
| Greenhouse Gas | NC Category | Source | 2011 | 2012 | % change | End User | 2011 | 2012 | % change | |----------------|-------------|--------|------|------|----------|----------|------|------|----------| | All Greenhouse gases (million tonnes carbon dioxide equivalent) | Energy supply | 190.8 | 202.0 | 5.9% | - | - | - | - | - | | | Transport | 118.5 | 118.0 | -0.4% | 134.9 | 133.6 | -0.9% | - | - | | | Business | 85.9 | 86.7 | 0.9% | 171.6 | 178.2 | 3.8% | - | - | | | Residential | 69.0 | 77.5 | 12.3% | 129.8 | 145.3 | 11.9% | - | - | | | Agriculture | 57.2 | 56.6 | -1.1% | 59.7 | 59.1 | -0.9% | - | - | | | Waste management | 22.7 | 21.6 | -4.8% | 22.7 | 21.6 | -4.8% | - | - | | | Industrial process | 10.3 | 9.8 | -4.5% | 11.0 | 10.6 | -4.3% | - | - | | | Public sector | 9.7 | 10.1 | 4.2% | 18.7 | 19.9 | 6.5% | - | - | | | Land use change | -7.5 | -7.0 | -6.8% | -7.5 | -7.0 | -6.8% | - | - | | | Exports | - | - | - | 15.7 | 14.0 | -10.8% | - | - | | | Total | 556.7 | 575.4 | 3.4% | 556.7 | 575.4 | 3.4% | - | - | | Carbon dioxide (million tonnes) | Energy supply | 182.0 | 192.9 | 6.0% | - | - | - | - | - | | | Transport | 117.4 | 116.9 | -0.5% | 133.1 | 131.8 | -0.9% | - | - | | | Business | 72.7 | 73.3 | 0.8% | 154.9 | 161.3 | 4.1% | - | - | | | Residential | 66.5 | 74.9 | 12.7% | 124.2 | 139.2 | 12.1% | - | - | | | Agriculture | 4.2 | 4.1 | -1.2% | 6.5 | 6.6 | 0.8% | - | - | | | Waste management | 0.3 | 0.3 | -6.3% | 0.3 | 0.3 | -6.3% | - | - | | | Industrial process | 9.5 | 9.3 | -2.0% | 10.0 | 9.9 | -1.7% | - | - | | | Public sector | 9.7 | 10.1 | 4.2% | 18.2 | 19.4 | 6.5% | - | - | | | Land use change | -8.2 | -7.7 | -6.0% | -8.2 | -7.7 | -6.0% | - | - | | | Exports | - | - | - | 15.0 | 13.4 | -10.8% | - | - | | | Total | 454.0 | 474.1 | 4.4% | 454.0 | 474.1 | 4.4% | - | - | | Methane (thousand tonnes) | Energy supply | 350.8 | 353.1 | 0.7% | - | - | - | - | - | | | Transport | 3.4 | 3.0 | -11.5% | 29.9 | 27.1 | -9.5% | - | - | | | Business | 6.3 | 6.3 | -0.8% | 145.3 | 139.4 | -4.1% | - | - | | | Residential | 22.2 | 22.9 | 3.1% | 149.4 | 164.9 | 10.4% | - | - | | | Agriculture | 1060.0 | 1057.8 | -0.2% | 1063.1 | 1060.6 | -0.2% | - | - | | | Waste management | 1011.2 | 959.1 | -5.2% | 1011.2 | 959.1 | -5.2% | - | - | | | Industrial process | 4.3 | 4.7 | 8.9% | 12.7 | 11.7 | -7.7% | - | - | | | Public sector | 0.9 | 1.0 | 4.3% | 21.0 | 22.2 | 5.7% | - | - | | | Land use change | 2.1 | 3.1 | 49.7% | 2.1 | 3.1 | 49.7% | - | - | | | Exports | - | - | - | 26.7 | 22.9 | -14.1% | - | - | | | Total | 2461.3 | 2410.9 | -2.0% | 2461.3 | 2410.9 | -2.0% | - | - | | Nitrous oxide (thousand tonnes) | Energy supply | 4.6 | 5.4 | 17.7% | - | - | - | - | - | | | Transport | 3.2 | 3.3 | 3.9% | 3.8 | 3.9 | 3.3% | - | - | | | Business | 2.6 | 2.9 | 8.4% | 4.5 | 5.1 | 14.6% | - | - | | | Residential | 0.4 | 0.4 | 3.9% | 1.7 | 2.1 | 22.1% | - | - | | | Agriculture | 99.4 | 97.6 | -1.8% | 99.5 | 97.7 | -1.8% | - | - | | | Waste management | 3.9 | 3.9 | 2.2% | 3.9 | 3.9 | 2.2% | - | - | | | Industrial process | 0.8 | 0.3 | -59.2% | 0.8 | 0.3 | -58.8% | - | - | | | Public sector | 0.0 | 0.0 | -3.7% | 0.2 | 0.3 | 19.6% | - | - | | | Land use change | 2.2 | 2.2 | -0.7% | 2.2 | 2.2 | -0.7% | - | - | | | Exports | - | - | - | 0.6 | 0.6 | -5.4% | - | - | | | Total | 117.1 | 116.1 | -0.8% | 117.1 | 116.1 | -0.8% | - | - | Uncertainties around the 2012 estimates
We are now also able to publish the uncertainty ranges associated with the final 2012 emissions estimates by source, which were published on 4th February 2014.
For details of how the uncertainty estimates are calculated, see the Uncertainties Annex of the UK’s National Inventory Report.
The uncertainty estimates vary a lot for different sectors and gases. For gases, carbon dioxide estimates have the least uncertainty associated with them while nitrous oxide estimates are the most uncertain. At sector level, the land use change, agriculture and waste management sectors are the most uncertain. The overall uncertainty around total GHG emissions for 2012 is estimated to be 5 per cent.
Uncertainty estimates for nitrous oxide and the agriculture sector were not published last year due to a highly skewed distribution. There has since been a review of the way that uncertainty estimates for emissions from agricultural soils are calculated, which has allowed us to publish uncertainty estimates this year. This is also the main cause of a decrease in overall uncertainty for emissions from all greenhouse gases weighted by GWP, which is estimated to be 5 per cent for 2012 emissions compared to the 2013 estimate of 17 per cent for 2011 emissions.
Table 18: Uncertainty in estimates of 2012 UK greenhouse gas emissions by gas (MtCO₂e)
| | 2012 emissions | Uncertainty around 2012 estimate, expressed as a 95% confidence interval | |----------------------|----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | Lower bound | Upper bound | | Carbon dioxide | 475.7 | 466.5 | 484.9 | | Methane | 50.8 | 42.4 | 62.8 | | Nitrous Oxide | 36.1 | 20.9 | 70.7 | | Hydrofluorocarbons | 14.1 | 13.3 | 15.0 | | Perfluorocarbons | 0.2 | 0.2 | 0.3 | | Sulphur hexafluoride | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.6 | | Total | 577.5 | 556.1 | 614.0 | Table 19: Uncertainty in estimates of 2012 UK greenhouse gas emissions by sector (MtCO$\_2$e)
| Sector | 2012 emissions | Uncertainty around 2012 estimate, expressed as a 95% confidence interval | |-------------------------|----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | Lower bound | Upper bound | | Energy Supply | 203.1 | 199.6 | 207.0 | | Transport | 118.5 | 115.8 | 121.2 | | Residential | 77.6 | 76.0 | 79.5 | | Business | 86.8 | 84.1 | 90.7 | | Public | 10.1 | 8.0 | 12.3 | | Industrial Process | 9.8 | 9.4 | 10.2 | | Agriculture | 56.8 | 41.7 | 91.2 | | Land Use Change | -7.0 | -14.8 | 0.9 | | Waste Management | 21.7 | 13.3 | 34.3 | | Total | 577.5 | 555.7 | 614.1 | UK performance against emissions reduction targets
The UK has both international and domestic targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Internationally the UK has a target for the first commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol to reduce its emissions by an average 12.5 per cent below base year levels over the five-year period 2008-12; and domestically it has the Carbon Budgets set out under the UK Climate Change Act, which set legally-binding limits on the total amount of GHG can emit for a given five-year period.
In reporting emissions reductions against these targets, the UK is required to take account of emissions trading through the various flexible mechanisms which have been established, including the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS).
DECC reported on performance against these targets in detail in the National Statistics release of 4th February 2014, which covered 2012 UK greenhouse gas emissions final figures. Performance was reported so as to take account of the latest available EU ETS data, also covering the 2012 calendar year. Since these are still the latest available data from the EU ETS, it is not possible to produce a further update showing performance against targets based on the provisional 2013 emissions estimates. DECC will report in the summer on progress towards targets once 2013 EU ETS data have become available. Future updates to emissions estimates
Final estimates of UK greenhouse gas emissions for 2013 will be published as National Statistics on 3rd February 2015. These estimates will be based on the UK’s National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory for 2013.
Further information and feedback
Further information on UK greenhouse gas emissions statistics, including Excel tables with additional data on UK emissions, can be found on the Gov.uk website at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/department-of-energy-climate-change/series/uk-greenhouse-gas-emissions Notes for editors
A full set of data tables can be accessed via the UK greenhouse gas emissions pages of the Gov.uk website.
1. The figures for 1990 to 2012 in this statistical release are from the National Atmospheric Emissions Inventory (NAEI), produced for DECC and the Devolved Administrations by Ricardo-AEA. Additional results will be released as they become available, including a full report to be published later in the year. For further information on the UK Greenhouse Gas Inventory, see the NAEI web site.
2. Further information about the Kyoto Protocol can be found on the UNFCCC’s website.
3. Further details of the European Union Emissions Trading System can be found at the EU ETS section of the Gov.uk website.
4. There are uncertainties associated with all estimates of greenhouse gas emissions. Although for any given year considerable uncertainties may surround the emissions estimates for a pollutant, it is important to note that trends over time are likely to be much more reliable. It is also important to note that the provisional 2013 estimates are subject to a greater range of uncertainty than the final figures for earlier years. For more information on these uncertainties see the page on the UK greenhouse gas inventory on the Gov.uk website.
5. The latest UK energy statistics, including revisions to earlier years’ data, can be found in the 2013 Digest of UK Energy Statistics.
6. Detailed UK temperature data can be found on both the Met Office website and the Energy Statistics section of the Gov.uk website.
7. When emissions are measured on this basis, UK emissions account for less than 2 per cent of the global total, based on a range of estimates produced by the UN, the IEA, the World Resources Institute and the EIA, amongst others. A National Statistics publication
National Statistics are produced to high professional standards set out in the Official Statistics Code of Practice. They undergo regular quality assurance reviews to ensure they meet customer needs.
© Crown copyright 2014 Department of Energy & Climate Change 3 Whitehall Place London SW1A 2AW www.gov.uk/decc
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0192-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 44,
"total-input-tokens": 105225,
"total-output-tokens": 21108,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
170,
1
],
[
170,
170,
2
],
[
170,
3845,
3
],
[
3845,
5412,
4
],
[
5412,
6265,
5
],
[
6265,
8278,
6
],
[
8278,
9618,
7
],
[
9618,
11855,
8
],
[
11855,
13614,
9
],
[
13614,
15435,
10
],
[
15435,
15557,
11
],
[
15557,
18790,
12
],
[
18790,
20500,
13
],
[
20500,
20823,
14
],
[
20823,
22734,
15
],
[
22734,
23975,
16
],
[
23975,
26790,
17
],
[
26790,
26918,
18
],
[
26918,
27924,
19
],
[
27924,
29735,
20
],
[
29735,
31795,
21
],
[
31795,
33161,
22
],
[
33161,
35296,
23
],
[
35296,
36555,
24
],
[
36555,
37773,
25
],
[
37773,
39903,
26
],
[
39903,
39999,
27
],
[
39999,
41598,
28
],
[
41598,
42564,
29
],
[
42564,
43466,
30
],
[
43466,
45134,
31
],
[
45134,
45919,
32
],
[
45919,
46806,
33
],
[
46806,
48629,
34
],
[
48629,
49593,
35
],
[
49593,
50529,
36
],
[
50529,
51867,
37
],
[
51867,
55388,
38
],
[
55388,
57566,
39
],
[
57566,
58702,
40
],
[
58702,
60080,
41
],
[
60080,
60645,
42
],
[
60645,
62428,
43
],
[
62428,
62774,
44
]
]
} |
51651733849fd8820e23eb93bfffaa9426f80fe0 | DCLG Salary Transparency
The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) has sought consent from individuals to publish the names and salaries of those staff earning a full-time salary over £60,000 (the Senior Civil Service minimum as at 31 March 2014). The Department recently published an updated Local Government Transparency Code 2014 which covers local authorities in England.
The full Local Government Transparency Code 2014 can be accessed here:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/local-government-transparency-code-2014
On the 31st March 2014, 151 Department staff were earning a full-time salary of £60,000 or higher. Please note that though all of these 151 staff have a full time salary of £60,000 or higher, some of these staff work part time and the salary they receive is adjusted accordingly. The figures quoted here all refer to the full time salaries of individuals, regardless of whether they work full time or not.
The breakdown of these staff in salary bands by DCLG Group is as follows:
| Group | Salary floor | Salary ceiling | Total | |------------------------|--------------|----------------|-------| | Permanent Secretary | £190,000 | £194,999 | 1 | | Finance & Corporate Services | £60,000 | £64,999 | 12 | | | £65,000 | £69,999 | 12 | | | £70,000 | £74,999 | 9 | | | £90,000 | £94,999 | 1 | | | £95,000 | £99,999 | 1 | | | £100,000 | £104,999 | 1 | | | £110,000 | £114,999 | 2 | | Finance & Corporate Services Total | | | 38 | | Localism | £60,000 | £64,999 | 15 | | | £65,000 | £69,999 | 7 | | | £70,000 | £74,999 | 5 | | | £85,000 | £89,999 | 3 | | | £90,000 | £94,999 | 2 | | | £105,000 | £109,999 | 1 | | | £120,000 | £124,999 | 1 | | | £160,000 | £164,999 | 1 | | Localism Total | | | 35 | | Neighbourhoods | £60,000 | £64,999 | 26 | | | £65,000 | £69,999 | 18 | | | £70,000 | £74,999 | 8 | | | £75,000 | £79,999 | 2 | | Neighbourhoods Total | 64 | |----------------------|----| | Strategy, Communication & Private Offices / Troubled Families Team / Other | | | £60,000 | £64,999 | 2 | | £65,000 | £69,999 | 5 | | £70,000 | £74,999 | 2 | | £75,000 | £79,999 | 1 | | £80,000 | £84,999 | 1 | | £110,000 | £114,999 | 1 | | £130,000 | £134,999 | 1 | | Strategy, Communication & Private Offices / Troubled Families Team / Other Total | 13 | | Grand Total | 151 |
51 DCLG staff earning a full-time salary over £60,000 consented to disclosure of their name and salary details in salary bands as follows:
| Last Name | First Name | Salary floor | Salary ceiling | |-----------|------------|--------------|---------------| | ALAFAT | TERRIE | £105,000 | £109,999 | | ALDRIDGE | STEPHEN | £100,000 | £104,999 | | BENIOFF | SARAH | £90,000 | £94,999 | | BOWREY | JULIAN | £70,000 | £74,999 | | BRODRICK | DAWN | £95,000 | £99,999 | | BUCHANAN | KIRSTY | £65,000 | £69,999 | | BURKITT | NICHOLAS | £60,000 | £64,999 | | CAMPBELL | ANDREW | £90,000 | £94,999 | | CARROLL | MARK | £105,000 | £109,999 | | CASEY | LOUISE | £130,000 | £134,999 | | COX | PHILIP | £90,000 | £94,999 | | DENNISON | SCOTT | £65,000 | £69,999 | | DEXTER | NICHOLAS | £70,000 | £74,999 | | DOWNIE | PAUL | £60,000 | £64,999 | | DUNCAN | GRAHAM | £65,000 | £69,999 | | EDWARDS | HELEN | £160,000 | £164,999 | | EVERTON | JANE | £70,000 | £74,999 | | FLETCHER | GRAHAM | £65,000 | £69,999 | | FOULDS | BRIAN | £65,000 | £69,999 | | HALL | ROBERT | £65,000 | £69,999 | | HILL | DAVID | £80,000 | £84,999 | | HOLLAND | PETER | £120,000 | £124,999 | | Name | First Name | Salary 1 | Salary 2 | |---------------|------------|----------|----------| | KEAN | ANDREW | £65,000 | £69,999 | | KERSLAKE | BOB | £190,000 | £194,999 | | KUENSSBERG | DAVID | £70,000 | £74,999 | | LEDSOME | ROBERT | £75,000 | £79,999 | | LEE | JACK | £65,000 | £69,999 | | LLEWELLYN | BENJAMIN | £65,000 | £69,999 | | LOCKHART | STEPHANIE | £60,000 | £64,999 | | MEGAINEY | CHRISTOPHER| £65,000 | £69,999 | | MOCKFORD | STUART | £65,000 | £69,999 | | MORGAN | ANDREW | £70,000 | £74,999 | | NEEDS | BRIGITTE | £60,000 | £64,999 | | NICHOLSON | GILL | £70,000 | £74,999 | | O’CONNOR | NEIL | £85,000 | £89,999 | | RANDALL | SALLY | £60,000 | £64,999 | | REED | MICHAEL | £65,000 | £69,999 | | RIDLEY | SIMON | £85,000 | £89,999 | | ROSSINGTON | DAVID | £110,000 | £114,999 | | SCATES | DARREN | £110,000 | £114,999 | | SCHOFIELD | PETER | £130,000 | £134,999 | | SHELDON | CAMILLA | £60,000 | £64,999 | | SMITH | DAVID | £70,000 | £74,999 | | STANIER | RUTH | £80,000 | £84,999 | | SWEENEY | JULIA | £80,000 | £84,999 | | TUKE | JOSEPH | £110,000 | £114,999 | | WALKER | THOMAS | £65,000 | £69,999 | | WECHSLER | THOMAS | £65,000 | £69,999 | | WHATMORE | ELIZABETH | £70,000 | £74,999 | | WHITE | PATRICK | £85,000 | £89,999 | | WILKIE | AIDAN | £70,000 | £74,999 |
- 33 staff did not respond.
- 67 staff did not consent to disclosure of their details.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0193-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 3,
"total-input-tokens": 9231,
"total-output-tokens": 2799,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
2617,
1
],
[
2617,
4590,
2
],
[
4590,
6320,
3
]
]
} |
22a2ed383d3e555436121c58ceb2937ff716d3ee | London Youth Employment Initiative Background Information - Paper One
This paper is part of a series that provides background information for colleagues taking part in the development of programmes as part of the London Youth Employment Initiative (YEI).
There are four papers in the series:
Paper One – Provides a brief overview of the YEI and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) in London
Paper Two – Provides a summary of the key responsibilities in the development of YEI programmes
Paper Three – Provides an outline of the programmes to be developed
Paper Four – Sets out the objectives for the Task and Finish Groups that have been established to develop programmes
This Paper explains what has changed in this funding round and includes links to sources of further detailed information
Background and Introduction The London Enterprise Panel (LEP) is responsible for setting the strategic direction and priorities of the London 2014-20 European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF). The LEP has been awarded €748.6m of European Social Fund (ESF) and European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) to invest in boosting jobs and growth for London. This note concentrates on the European Social Fund (ESF) in London, particularly how ESF is used in support of young people.
Summary of Changes Compared with previous Programmes, there are some differences for the 2014-20 ESF Programme:
- In addition to the main ESF allocation, there is an additional allocation for the EU-wide YEI targeted at areas that have a youth unemployment rate of 25% or above (Inner London(^1) is one such area) – in London the entire ESF Youth allocation will be combined with YEI will in order to create a London-wide programme covering all boroughs;
- There is an emphasis on targeted employment provision leading to incentivised and sustained outcomes;
- Innovation, collaboration and simplification are recurring themes in EU strategies demonstrated by the intended closer link between ESF and ERDF Programmes.
(^1) City of London, Camden, Hackney, Hammersmith & Fulham, Haringey, Islington, Kensington & Chelsea, Lambeth, Lewisham, Newham, Southwark, Tower Hamlet, Wandsworth and Westminster LEP, the GLA and Opt-In Organisations
Although the Government will oversee a national ESF Programme, the new Programme will have a strong local influence within the UK. In the previous ESF Programme most of the ESF Funds have passed through national Co-Financing Organisations (CFOs) for the delivery of nationally-commissioned programmes, however the 2014-2020 ESIF Programme will see Local Enterprise Partnerships in the driving seat – the London Enterprise Panel (LEP), chaired by the Mayor, fulfils this function for the capital and, consequently, is being given more control over policies, strategies and investment to support economic growth.
The LEP has been asked to set out an ESIF strategy based on “evidence-based narrative” to outline plans for London's share of the available funds. In London the LEP ESIF strategy was submitted to Government in January 2014 and is currently being finalised, a link to the draft strategy is below. The LEP ESIF strategy was developed following consultation with key stakeholders including London Councils: Young People's Education and Skills.
The LEP will effectively ‘commission’ Opt-in Organisations, whose role will be largely similar to those of CFOs in the previous Programme, to deliver local and London-wide programmes that meet the needs of residents and businesses. Opt-in Organisations have proposed what they can offer to the LEP in terms of expertise in commissioning and access to match funding. The LEP has the option to ‘opt-in’ to these offers, in London the Opt-in Organisations are the Skills Funding Agency (SFA), Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and Big Lottery Fund (BIG). The SFA will be the main Opt-in organisation for young people’s programmes.
The European Programmes Management Unit, within the GLA will act as an “Intermediate Body” (IB) on behalf of the Government, a role it fulfils in the present programme. The role of IB involves the general administering of the ESF Programme through the developing of priorities for ESF funding and monitoring Programme performance.
London Allocation
London received the largest ESIF allocation of any of the 39 Local Enterprise Partnerships, comprising approximately £641m, £465m for ESF and £176m for ERDF. Inner London has also attracted a further £37m through the YEI. With match-funding in line with the rules for these funds, the total size of the Programme exceeds £1.2 billion over the next seven years.
Age range
In one final major change for the next funding round, the priority age range has been defined as 15-24 (currently there are separate approaches for 16-18 and 18-24).
Further Information can be found at these websites:
European Social Fund in England: [http://www.dwp.gov.uk/esf/about-esf/](http://www.dwp.gov.uk/esf/about-esf/)
London LEP ESIF Strategy 2014-2020: [www.london.gov.uk/esif-draft-strategy](http://www.london.gov.uk/esif-draft-strategy)
London Councils European Service: [http://www.londoncouncils.glegroup.co.uk/](http://www.londoncouncils.glegroup.co.uk/)
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0194-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 5597,
"total-output-tokens": 1270,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
2203,
1
],
[
2203,
5228,
2
]
]
} |
5931e0413c720b5d44a08b13ad95b7bdb091e31f | This paper is part of a series that provides background information for colleagues taking part in the development of programmes as part of the London Youth Employment Initiative (YEI).
There are four papers in the series:
- **Paper One** – Provides a brief overview of the YEI and European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) in London
- **Paper Two** – Provides a summary of the key responsibilities in the development of YEI programmes
- **Paper Three** – Provides an outline of the programmes to be developed
- **Paper Four** – Sets out the objectives for the Task and Finish Groups that have been established to develop programmes
This Paper summarises the main responsibilities for the development of YEI in London. The London Enterprise Panel (LEP) is chaired by Mayor of London and is the body through which the Mayor works with London’s boroughs, business and Transport for London to take a strategic view of the regeneration, employment and skills agenda for London. It has overall responsibility for London’s ESIF strategy and funding priorities.
The role of the Skills & Employment Working Group is to inform the LEP’s approach to: (a) championing skills in London and to propose priorities for skills training in London (age 14+); (b) making recommendations to the LEP on issues related to skills and employment in London including improving efficiency and effectiveness of existing skills and employment provision in London; and (c) making recommendations to government on behalf of business, the Mayor, Boroughs on issues related to skills and employment in London. Its membership includes local, city-wide and national government organisations / agencies, provider representatives and businesses. It offers critical advice about ESIF and makes recommendations to the LEP about the YEI and its programmes.
The Youth Employment Initiative (YEI) Planning Group ensures that strategic partners work closely together in the planning and implementation of the YEI element of the London ESIF Strategy and that YEI is introduced efficiently and with maximum benefit for young people. It builds on the work of the YPES External Funding Group which has promoted over the last three years a consistent approach to the integrated commissioning of youth programmes in London. Its members include the Greater London Authority (GLA), London Councils and Opt-In Organisations.
The GLA has five main roles in the YEI strategy / priorities for London:
1. The GLA’s Economic and Business Policy Unit (EBPU) brings public and private sector bodies together in London to achieve the Mayor’s vision and economic development strategy. It facilitates the LEP’s agreement of the ESIF strategy and funding priorities for London;
2. It provides the European Programmes Management Unit (EPMU), the “Intermediate Body” for London that ensures delivery of the strategy and programmes;
3. Through its Education and Young People Division (E&YP) it supports the implementation of the Mayor’s priorities for Children and Young People;
4. The GLA’s Delivery Unit commissions programmes funded as part of the 2007-2013 EU Structural Funds programme and will be commissioning programmes through its role as a local match funder in the LEP ESIF 2014-20 programme;
5. GLA (primarily through GLA Economics) provides London-wide data that underpins the strategy, assessment of need and programme design.
London Councils is a cross-party organisation representing London’s 32 borough councils and the City of London. It develops policy and provides London-wide services. London boroughs are involved in structural funds in a three ways:
1. Boroughs directly access funds for local schemes
2. Boroughs influence the content of programmes so that they are more responsive to local circumstances
3. With London Councils acting as a Co-Financing Organisation (CFO) on behalf of boroughs, boroughs directly run programmes that address local priorities.
There are two divisions of London Councils that are involved in the YEI. The Young People’s Education and Skills Board (YPES) is the lead strategic body for education and training services for young people aged 14-19 in London. It provides pan-London leadership for 14-19 education and training provision in relation to the current and future needs of learners and employers, supports local authorities in undertaking their statutory functions, and assists other stakeholders in planning, policy and provision. London Councils’ Policy And Public Affairs Directorate (PAPA) includes within its remit for economic development: enabling boroughs to improve the effectiveness of employment programmes in London; improving the skills system for the capital’s employers and residents; driving economic growth through high streets and town centres; supporting boroughs to develop the infrastructure to generate economic growth; supporting boroughs to create good quality apprenticeships (particularly through procurement); engaging employers to generate apprenticeship opportunities (especially for 16-18 year-olds) and influencing the development of EU Structural Fund programmes for 2014-2020 in London.
The main Opt-In Organisation for YEI will be the Skills Funding Agency, though the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) and the Big Lottery Fund are also Opt-in organisations and will be involved in the design and delivery of programmes.
Programmes will be developed through Task and Finish Groups made up of the above strategic partners and other stakeholders.
Other stakeholders (i.e. organisations not taking part in the YEI Planning Group) are involved in the development of programmes because:
- they can add insight to the specific needs of priority disadvantaged groups identified in the ESIF Strategy for London;
- they have prior experience in delivering programmes;
- they have local knowledge that can add value to the design of programmes;
References:
2014-2020 ESIF Strategy for London (latest draft): [www.london.gov.uk/esif-draft-strategy](http://www.london.gov.uk/esif-draft-strategy)
LEP Jobs and Growth Plan: [http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/business-economy/publications/london-enterprise-panel-publishes-its-job-and-growth-plan-for](http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/business-economy/publications/london-enterprise-panel-publishes-its-job-and-growth-plan-for)
GLA Economics: [http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/business-economy/publications/gla-economics](http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/business-economy/publications/gla-economics)
GLA - EPMU: [https://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/business-economy/championing-london/london-and-european-structural-funds](https://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/business-economy/championing-london/london-and-european-structural-funds)
LEP: [http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/business-economy/working-in-partnership/london-enterprise-panel/about-lep](http://www.london.gov.uk/priorities/business-economy/working-in-partnership/london-enterprise-panel/about-lep)
London Councils (economic development): [http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/policylobbying/economicdevelopment/](http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/policylobbying/economicdevelopment/)
London Councils: YPES: [http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/policylobbying/children/education14to19/default.htm](http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/policylobbying/children/education14to19/default.htm)
Skills Funding Agency: [https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/skills-funding-agency](https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/skills-funding-agency)
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0195-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 3,
"total-input-tokens": 8033,
"total-output-tokens": 1729,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
726,
1
],
[
726,
4466,
2
],
[
4466,
7506,
3
]
]
} |
8c64c7e40227b7db932bff54c8f807239a75c308 | Criminal court statistics quarterly, England and Wales, January to March 2017
Including statistics on the use of language interpreter and translation services in courts and tribunals
Outstanding cases in magistrates courts have fallen
In 2016, disposals remained higher than receipts which resulted in the number of outstanding cases dropping by 11% from 327,200 in 2015 to 291,400 in 2016.
Outstanding cases in the Crown Court have fallen
Both receipts and disposals fell during 2016, by 10% and 6% respectively from 2015. Disposals remained higher than receipts in 2016, continuing to drive the decrease in outstanding cases.
The overall guilty plea rate in the Crown Court was 67% in 2016
Since 2014 the guilty plea rate has fallen from 70% to 67% in 2016, the lowest rate since 2006. The proportion of guilty pleas entered prior to trial was 61% in 2016.
Average waiting times have fallen since 2015
Average waiting times have fallen slightly for both guilty plea and not guilty plea trials, to 15.1 weeks and 32.3 weeks respectively in 2016.
The average number of days from first listing to completion in the Crown Court has decreased
For cases completing in the Crown Court the average number of days from first listing at the magistrates’ court to completion in the Crown Court decreased by 2 days from 196 days in 2015 to 194 days in 2016.
Interpreters: The success rate of completed service requests remained stable
The success rate for completed language interpreter and translation service requests was 97% in Q1 2017, similar to Q1 2016.
This is the annual edition of the ‘Criminal courts statistics quarterly’ publication and will feature analysis on a calendar year basis.
The technical guide to Criminal court statistics can be found here: www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-guide-to-criminal-court-statistics
1 All the statistics on the use of language interpreter and translation services in courts and tribunals are Official Statistics, except the statistics under the new contracts which are ‘Provisional Statistics’.
1. Criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts
Outstanding cases in magistrates courts have fallen by 11% between 2015 and 2016
Receipts decreased by 4% between 2015 and 2016, whilst disposals decreased by 2%. Overall in 2016, disposals remained higher than receipts which resulted in the number of outstanding cases falling by 11% from 327,200 at the end of 2015 to 291,400 at the end of 2016.
Figure 1: Magistrates’ courts caseload, Q2 2012 to Q1 2017 (Source: Table M1)
Magistrates’ court caseload (Figure 1)
The number of receipts decreased by 4% from 2015 to 1.53 million in 2016. However, the number of receipts has risen in the latest quarter by 3% from Q4 2016 to 384,800 in Q1 2017.
Between 2015 and 2016, the number of disposals decreased by 2% from 1.59 million to 1.57 million in 2016. Since Q4 2016, the number of disposals has increased by 9% to 401,900 in Q1 2017.
With disposals continuing to be higher than receipts, the number of outstanding cases fell by 11% from 327,200 at the end of 2015 to 291,400 at the end of 2016. Since Q4 2016, the number of outstanding cases has decreased further by 1% to 288,500 in Q1 2017. Effectiveness of magistrates’ courts’ trials
Figure 2: Trial effectiveness in magistrates’ courts, 2010 and 2016 (Source: Table M2)
Since 2010 the total number of trials in magistrates’ courts has fallen by 17% to 149,400 in 2016. Of these trials, the proportion that were effective increased over the period by 4 percentage points to 47%, whilst the proportion of cracked trials fell by 1 percentage point to 38% and the proportion of ineffective trials fell by 3 percentage points to 15%.
Figure 3: Cracked trials by reasons in magistrates’ courts, 2010 and 2016 (Source: Table AM2)
The proportion of trials that cracked due to ‘acceptable guilty plea(s) entered late’ has decreased by 7 percentage points since 2010. There has been a corresponding increase in the proportion that have cracked due to ‘prosecution end case’, where the prosecution decides not to proceed the case against the defendant, increasing by 12 percentage points to 46% in 2016.
Figure 4: Ineffective trials by reasons in magistrates’ courts, 2010 and 2016 (Source: Table AM1)
The most common reasons for an ineffective trial are ‘court administration’ and ‘defendant absent/unfit to stand’, with both of these proportions increasing since 2010 by 3 and 4 percentage points respectively. Alongside these increases, the proportion of ineffective trials due to ‘prosecution witness absent’ has fallen since 2010 by 4 percentage points to 14% in 2016. 2. Criminal cases in the Crown Court
Outstanding cases in Crown Court fell to 42,100 at the end of 2016
Both receipts and disposals fell during 2016, by 10% and 6% respectively from 2015. Disposals remained higher than receipts in 2016, continuing to drive the decrease in outstanding cases, which have declined in each of the last two years.
Figure 5: Crown Court caseload annual trend, 2000 to 2016 (Source: Table C1)
Receipts (Figure 5, table C1)
Overall, receipts rose by 36% from 2000 to a peak of 152,800 in 2010. They then decreased by 13% between 2010 and 2012 followed by a small increase to 2013 before reducing by 16% between 2013 and 2016. The number of receipts in 2016 was the lowest since 2000 (117,200).
The overall trend in receipts has been mostly driven by triable-either-way cases which, following a peak in 2014, have seen a decline of 24% between 2014 and 2016. Indictable only case receipts have followed a similar trend but to a lesser extent, falling by 16% since 2014. More recently, committed for sentence receipts have increased by 3% between 2015 and 2016, whilst appeals against magistrates’ decisions case receipts have fallen by around 8% over the same period.
Following a decline during 2016, receipts increased by 5% between Q4 2016 and Q1 2017 to 29,700 (table C1). This change since Q4 2016 has been driven by the 7% increase in receipts for cases committed for sentence, a 4% increase in triable-either-way receipts and a 5% increase in indictable only case receipts. The number of receipts for appeals against magistrates’ decisions remained stable in the latest quarter. Disposals (Figure 5, table C1)
Following a fairly similar pattern to receipts, disposals rose by 32% between 2000 and 2010 but then fell by 18% to 126,300 in 2016. Disposals were higher than receipts in both 2015 and 2016, the first times since 2012.
Similar to receipts, the overall trend in disposals has been mainly driven by triable-either-way cases, with an overall decrease of 18% between 2010 and 2016. Indictable only disposals, which are lower in volume than triable-either-way disposals, have gradually declined since 2013, with an overall decrease of 11% between 2013 and 2016. Committed for sentence disposals fell between 2011 and 2015, followed by a small increase of 4% in 2016. Appeals against magistrates’ decisions case disposals have decreased by 6% between 2015 and 2016.
Disposals increased in Q1 2017, with a 10% rise to 31,700 from Q4 2016, although they were still 6% lower than in Q1 2016. This increase in disposals in Q1 2017 was mainly driven by the 10% increase in triable-either-way and 12% increase in committed for sentence case disposals. Disposals for indictable only and appeals against magistrates’ decisions cases also increased in the quarter, but to a lesser extent at 7% and 9% respectively. Disposals have now remained higher than receipts for the last 9 quarters, driving the declining trend in outstanding cases (table C1).
Outstanding cases (Figure 5, table C1)
Between 2000 and 2009, there was a 53% rise in outstanding cases. Following a decrease in outstanding cases between 2010 and 2012, cases subsequently rose between 2012 and 2014. Since then outstanding cases have fallen by 24% to 42,100 at the end of 2016. This decline reflects the number of disposals being higher than receipts through 2015 and 2016. At the end of 2016 the number of outstanding cases were at the lowest level since 2012.
Following an increase in the number of outstanding triable-either way cases from 2012 to a peak in 2014, there was a sharp decline of 32% between 2014 and 2016. Indictable only cases have followed a similar trend but to a lesser extent falling by 20% between 2014 and 2016. Following a period of fluctuation, committed for sentence outstanding cases have been fairly stable since 2012. The number of outstanding cases for appeals against magistrates’ decisions has remained fairly stable throughout the time series.
Between Q4 2016 and Q1 2017, outstanding cases declined by 5% to 40,000 cases, the lowest number since Q1 2013 (table C1). This decline in outstanding cases at the end of Q1 2017 was mainly driven by the 6% decline in triable-either-way outstanding cases. Outstanding cases also declined for indictable only cases by 3%, committed for sentence by 5% and appeals against magistrates’ decisions by 8%. Receipts by offence group ² (Figure 6)
In 2016 the four offence groups with the highest number of for trial receipts, in order, were; violence against the person, miscellaneous crimes against society, drug offences and theft offences. The number of receipts for these offences have been declining since 2014; by 21% for violence against the person offences, by 14% for miscellaneous crimes against society, by 25% for drug offences and by 32% for theft offences. Following an increasing trend since 2012, receipts for sexual offences also fell slightly between 2015 and 2016, falling by 3% to 9,500 in 2016.
Between Q4 2016 and Q1 2017 the number of receipts for violence against the person and drug offences increased by 7% and 6% respectively. Over the same time period, receipts for theft offences had a 2% increase, whilst miscellaneous crimes against society receipts had a 2% decline.
Figure 7: For trial case disposals by offence group, Q1 2010 to Q1 2017 (Source: Pivot table 1)
² The analysis of the data by individual offence group in the Crown Court excludes summary offences due to small numbers and also excludes unknown offences. Disposals by offence group (Figure 7)
Similar to receipts, the offence groups in 2016 with the highest number of for trial disposals, in order, were: violence against the person, miscellaneous crimes against society, drug offences and theft offences. Between 2013 and 2015 the number of disposals slowly increased, although this was followed by a decrease for all four of the offence groups listed; between 2015 and 2016 disposals for violence against the person fell by 11%, miscellaneous crimes against society by 2%, drug offences by 12% and theft offences by 16%. Unlike most offence groups, the number of disposals for sexual offences increased by 8% from 2015 to 10,200 in 2016.
More recently, between Q4 2016 and Q1 2017, the number of disposals increased for the four offence groups listed. Violence against the person disposals increased by 8%, miscellaneous crimes against society by 14%, drug offences by 13% and theft offences by 12%.
Figure 8: For trial cases outstanding at the end of the quarter, by offence group, Q1 2010 to Q1 2017 (Source: Pivot table 1)
Outstanding cases by offence group (Figure 8)
At the end of 2016 the four offences with the highest number of for trial outstanding cases, in order, were: violence against the person, sexual offences, miscellaneous crimes against society and drug offences. The number of outstanding cases has fallen throughout 2016 for all offence groups. For three of the largest offence groups; violence against the person, miscellaneous crimes against society and drug offences, the number of outstanding cases have been falling since their numbers peaked at the end of Q1 2015; by the end of 2016, violence against the person outstanding cases were 16% lower than at the end of 2015, miscellaneous crimes against society offences were 20% lower and drug offences were 27% lower. Outstanding cases of sexual offences peaked at 6,600 at the end of Q1 2016, but have decreased overall by 9%, from 6,500 to 5,900 cases, between 2015 and 2016, this has been driven by the number of disposals becoming higher than receipts in 2016.
In the most recent quarter, the number of outstanding cases has fallen for most offence groups. At the end of Q1 2017 the number of cases outstanding fell for violence against the person by 4%, sexual offences by 7%, miscellaneous crimes against society by 10% and drug offences by 4% compared with the previous quarter. The proportion of effective trials has increased to 51% in 2016 Since 2010 the proportion of trials that were effective has gradually increased to 51% in 2016, with a corresponding decrease in cracked trials to 34% in 2016. The proportion of ineffective trials has remained at a similar level, at 15% in 2016.
Figure 9: Effectiveness of Crown Court trials, 2010 and 2016 (Source: Table C2)
Effectiveness of Crown Court trials (Figure 9) In 2010 the percentage of Crown Court trials that were effective was the lowest proportion recorded, at 44%. Between 2010 and 2016 the proportion of effective trials increased overall by 7 percentage points to 51%, whilst the proportion of trials that were cracked had a corresponding 8 percentage point decrease from 43% in 2010 to 34% in 2016. The proportion of trials that were ineffective has remained fairly stable, increasing by around 1 percentage point since 2010 to 15% in 2016.
Figure 10: Cracked trials by reasons in Crown Court, 2010 and 2016 (Source: Table AC3)
‘Defendant enters late guilty plea’ is the main reason for cracked trials; since 2010 the proportion of cracked trials where the defendant has entered a late guilty plea has increased by 3 percentage points to 66% in 2016. A corresponding decrease can be seen in the percentage of cracked trials due to ‘defendant pleads guilty to alternative charge’ which decreased by 2 percentage points since 2010. In 2016 ‘defendant absent/unfit to stand’ was the most frequent reason for an ineffective trial at 26%, an increase of 4 percentage points since 2010. A corresponding decrease can be seen in the proportion of trials that were ineffective due to ‘prosecution witness absent’ which has decreased by 5 percentage points since 2010 to 16% in 2016.
Trial effectiveness by offence group (Figure 12)
In 2016, the proportion of effective trials for all offences was 51%, sexual offences had the highest proportion of effective trials at 79%. Criminal damage and arson had the lowest proportion of effective trials at 36% in 2016, and also had the highest proportion of cracked trials at 47%. For the majority of the offence groups the proportion of ineffective trials was between 15% and 18% in 2016, but sexual offences had a much lower proportion of ineffective trials at 9%, whilst fraud offences had a much higher proportion of ineffective trials at 20%. The overall guilty plea rate in the Crown Court was 67% in 2016 Since 2014 the guilty plea rate has fallen from 70% to 67% in 2016, the lowest rate since 2006. The proportion of guilty pleas entered prior to trial was 61% in 2016.
Figure 13: Guilty plea rate in the Crown Court, 2001 to 2016 (Source: Table C3)
Guilty plea rate in all trial cases (Figure 13) Between 2001 and 2009 the guilty plea rate increased by 14 percentage points to 71%. Between 2010 and 2015 the guilty plea rate fluctuated between 70% and 68%, standing at 69% in 2015. Since then it has fallen slightly to 67% in 2016, the lowest level since 2006. In the latest quarter the guilty plea rate has increased slightly, from 65% in Q4 2016 to 66% in Q1 2017.
Figure 14: Stage at which a plea of guilty was entered in the Crown Court, 2010 and 2016 (Source: Table C4)
Stage at which a plea of guilty was entered in all trial cases (Figure 14) Since 2010 the proportion of guilty pleas that were entered ‘prior to trial’ has fallen, from 68% to 61% in 2016. Corresponding with this fall was an increase in the proportion of guilty pleas resulting in a ‘cracked trial’; despite a decrease in the volumes, the proportion pleading guilty at this stage increased by 3 percentage points from 2010 to 28% in 2016. The proportion where a guilty plea was entered ‘at other hearings’ also increased, by 4 percentage points to 7%. The proportion of guilty pleas entered during trial or at an unknown stage have remained fairly constant throughout the time series, at around 1% and 3% respectively. Figure 15: Guilty plea rate by offence group in the Crown Court, 2016 (Source: Pivot table 3)
Guilty plea rate in all trial cases by offence (Figure 15)
In 2016 the offence group with the highest guilty plea rate was drug offences at 82%, compared to the overall guilty plea rate of 67% for all offences. The offence group with the lowest guilty plea rate was sexual offences at 34%. Violence against the person had the second lowest guilty plea rate (62%) but still had a much higher rate than sexual offences.
Figure 16: Stage at which a plea of guilty was entered by offence, in the Crown Court, 2016 (Source: Pivot 3)
Stage at which a plea of guilty was entered in all trial cases by offence group (Figure 16)
In 2016, the proportion of guilty pleas entered prior to trial was 61% for all offences. The offence group with the greatest proportion of guilty pleas prior to trial was drug offences at 67%, these cases are more likely to have substantial evidence which may influence an earlier plea. The offence group with the smallest proportion of guilty pleas prior to trial at 51% was violence against the person. Violence against the person also had the highest proportion of guilty pleas resulting in a cracked trial at 39%, 11 percentage points higher than the ‘all offences’ figure of 28%. Average waiting times have fallen since 2015 Average waiting times have fallen slightly for both guilty plea and not guilty plea trials, to 15.1 weeks and 32.3 weeks respectively in 2016.
Average hearing times increased slightly between 2015 and 2016 The average hearing time for not guilty plea trials was 13.8 hours in 2016, a small increase of 0.2 hours from 13.6 hours in 2015. Similarly, the average hearing time of guilty plea trials, increased by 0.1 hours to 1.6 hours in 2016.
Figure 17: Average waiting time in Crown Court by plea, Q1 2010 to Q1 2017 (Source: Table C6)
Average waiting times at the Crown Court (Figure 17) Average waiting times for all trial cases increased between 2013 and 2015, but have recently been followed by a small decrease between 2015 and 2016, decreasing by 0.5 weeks to 15.1 weeks for guilty plea trials in 2016 and by 0.4 weeks to 32.3 weeks for not guilty plea trials. Waiting times have continued to decrease in the latest quarter; since Q4 2016 the average waiting time for guilty plea trials has decreased by 0.6 weeks to 14.3 weeks in Q1 2017 and by 0.8 weeks to 30.5 weeks for not guilty plea trials. Average waiting times by offence group (Figure 18)
The 2 offence groups with the longest waiting times in 2016 were fraud offences (29.2 weeks) and sexual offences (26.6 weeks); these are cases which tend to be complex and can require ticketed judges, so may require more time to prepare. The offences with the shortest average waiting times were drug offences at 16.1 weeks and theft offences at 16.3 weeks.
Figure 19: Average hearing time in Crown Court by case type, Q1 2010 to Q1 2017 (Source: Table C6) Average hearing times at the Crown Court (Figure 19)
Average hearing times for not guilty plea trials slowly increased to 14.1 hours in 2013, they fell to 13.6 hours in 2015, after which they increased slightly to around 13.8 hours in 2016. Towards the end of 2016 the average hearing time for not guilty plea trials began to increase and was at 14.6 hours in Q4 2016, increasing to 15.5 hours in Q1 2017. Hearing times for all guilty plea trials have gradually increased since 2010, increasing overall by 0.4 hours from 1.3 hours to 1.6 hours in 2016.
Figure 20: Average hearing time for all trial cases in Crown Court by offence, 2016 (Source: Pivot 3)
Average hearing times by offence group (Figure 20)
The average hearing time for all trial cases was 5.5 hours in 2016. Similar to the pattern for waiting times, the offence groups with the longest average hearing times in 2016 were sexual offences (11.0 hours) and fraud offences (9.6 hours). Theft offences had the lowest average hearing time in 2016 at 2.7 hours, whilst criminal damage and arson had a similar average hearing time at just over 2.7 hours. The proportion of defendants with known representation(^3) has fallen since 2010
In 2016, 93% of defendants had known representation compared to 95% in 2010.
**Representation by year(^3) (table AC10)**
The proportion of defendants dealt with in the Crown Court who were known to have had legal representation(^3) has decreased by 2 percentage points between 2010 and 2016. During 2016, 93% (81,600) of defendants were represented by an advocate at the first hearing whilst 7% (6,200) of defendants had no advocate or unknown representation at first hearing. This compares to 95% and 5% respectively in 2010.
The proportion of defendants represented at first hearing by an advocate only, with no solicitor representation, had increased between 2010 and 2015, but has since fallen in 2016. In 2016, of those defendants represented by an advocate, the proportion with no solicitor accounted for 16% (13,300), a 2 percentage point drop on the 2015 figure of 18% (16,500); the 2016 figure of 16% is still higher than in 2010, however, when it was 2% (2,300).
**Representation and hearings**
In 2016, 36% of represented defendants had two or less hearings, while 16% of defendants whose representation was unknown or were known to be unrepresented had two or less hearings. Conversely, 17% of represented defendants had six or more hearings, compared with 31% who had no or unknown representation.
**Guilty plea cases had the highest proportion of defendants elected to the Crown Court at the ‘direction of magistrates’**
In 2016 94% of defendants pleading guilty in the magistrates’ courts were elected to the Crown Court at the ‘direction of magistrates’.
**Table 21: Election type in Crown court by plea, in 2016 (Source: Table AC13)**
| Election of defendants in the Crown Court (Figure 21) | |------------------------------------------------------| | In 2016, those pleading guilty at the magistrates’ courts had a greater proportion of defendants elected to the Crown Court at the ‘direction of magistrates’ at 94%, while those pleading not guilty had a much lower proportion at 87%. |
(^3) Representation is classed as defendants who were known to be represented by an advocate or solicitor at first hearing. 3. Timeliness
The average number of days from first listing to completion in the Crown Court has decreased
For cases completing in the Crown Court the average number of days from first listing in magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court decreased by 2 days from 196 days in 2015 to 194 days in 2016.
Figure 22: Average number of days (mean) from first listing in the magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court, for Crown Court criminal cases, Q2 2010 to Q1 2017 (Source: Table T4)
Crown Court criminal cases - First listing in the magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court (Figure 22)
The overall time from first listing to completion in the Crown Court decreased between 2015 and 2016, which also corresponded to a fall in the number of outstanding cases.
The average time from first listing at the magistrates’ court to receipt by the Crown Court has remained at around 6 days, the time from receipt at the Crown Court to main hearing has remained at 138 days, whilst time from main hearing to completion has decreased slightly from 52 days in 2015 to 51 days in 2016.
The overall time from first listing to completion in the Crown Court peaked at 218 days in Q4 2016, the highest of the time series, before decreasing to 178 days in Q1 2017. The majority of this decrease in the latest quarter was in the time from receipt at the Crown Court to main hearing, which decreased by 28 days from 155 days in Q4 2016 to 127 days in Q1 2017. This decrease in waiting times is possibly as a result of the courts having cleared some of their backlog of outstanding cases. Figure 23: Average duration of all criminal court cases from charge to completion by offence, 2016 (Source: Table T6)
The average duration from charge to completion for all criminal court cases was 67 days in 2016. This ranged from 53 days for summary non-motoring cases to 232 days for sexual offences cases.
Figure 24: Number of defendants in cases completed in the magistrates’ courts, by single justice cases and other cases, Q1 2015 to Q1 2017 (Source: Tables T1 and T2)
Magistrates’ court criminal cases – number of defendants in Single Justice Procedure cases (Figure 24)
46% of defendants in cases completed in the magistrates’ courts in Q1 2017 were in Single Justice Procedure cases, up from 41% in Q4 2016. The Single Justice Procedure was introduced in May 2015, and since then the proportion of total cases completed has steadily increased in each quarter. Annex A: Enforcement of financial impositions
Total financial impositions increased by 10% between 2015 and 2016
Total financial impositions have increased between 2015 and 2016 due to increased fines and compensations in 2016.
Figure 25: HMCTS management information: Financial impositions by imposition type, England and Wales, Q2 2011 – Q1 2017 (Source: Table A2)
Note: The Criminal Court Charge (CCC) ceased to exist on 24 December 2015 but impositions still appear due to when the data are entered onto the system.
Financial impositions and amounts paid by imposition type (Figure 25, table A2)
Despite the cessation of the CCC at the end of 2015 total financial impositions still increased overall by 10% between 2015 and 2016, mainly due to the 35% increase in fine impositions during 2016. They have also increased in the latest quarter, driven by the 10% increase in compensation impositions between Q4 2016 and Q1 2017 as well as the 9% increase in victims surcharge impositions during that same period.
In 2016, 14% (£88 million) of all criminal court financial impositions were paid within the imposition month, an increase of 3 percentage points compared to 2015.
Outstanding financial impositions (Table A4)
In 2016, the total value of financial impositions outstanding in England and Wales was £776 million. The amount of outstanding financial impositions has been increasing since Q1 2014, and showed an increase of 8% between Q4 2016 and Q1 2017. The increase since Q2 2015 is partially due to owed criminal court charge payments. Annex B: Juror Statistics
The number of juror summons increased by 2% in 2016
There was a small increase in juror summons to 369,300 in 2016, whilst the proportion of juror summons excused remained the same at 27%.
There were 369,300 juror summons issued in 2016, a 2% increase compared to the number of juror summons issued in 2015. Around 27% of all juror summons (99,900) were excused, the same proportion as the previous year. There were 180,800 jurors supplied to the court in 2016, an increase of 1% from 2015.
Figure 26: Number of juror sitting days and juror utilisation rate, 2006 to 2016 (Source: table J2)
The juror utilisation rate is the number of sitting days divided by the sum of sitting, non-sitting and non-attendance days. Since 2006 the juror utilisation rate has risen, overall, by 11 percentage points to the current rate of 70% in 2016, although more recently it has dropped slightly from 72% in 2014. The overall increase may be the result of the introduction of a programme on the part of HMCTS to reduce the burden on jurors and make the best use of their time. Annex C: The use of language interpreter and translation services in courts and tribunals
New contractors from November 2016
From 31 October 2016, language interpreter and translation services have started to be delivered by two new suppliers. A new independent quality assurance service has also started to be provided by The Language Shop (London Borough of Newham). This replaces the old contract MoJ had with Capita Translation and Interpreting. The data within this release covers face-to-face spoken and non-spoken interpretation services. For more detail please see the accompanying technical guide.
The off contract figures continue to be official statistics as these data are unaffected by the contract change. However, bookings and complaints from 31 October 2016 made under the new contract are published as ‘provisional’ statistics as differences in deliverables across the old and new contracts mean these are still subject to review.
The total number of completed service requests was slightly higher in Q1 2017 compared to the same period in 2016
A total of 39,900 completed service requests for language interpreter and translation services were made in Q1 2017, a 4% increase compared to Q1 2016
The success rate of completed service requests in Q1 2017 was similar to Q1 2016
The success rate for completed service requests was 97% in Q1 2017, similar to Q1 2016
Figure 27: Number of completed language service requests and overall success rate, Q1 2013 to Q1 2017 (Source: Table L1) Completed service requests (Figure 27)
A total of 155,200 completed service requests for language interpreter and translation services were made in 2016, a 1% increase compared to 2015. Between 2015 and 2016, the total number of requests made by criminal courts decreased by 11% to 78,100, while the total number of requests made by tribunals and civil and family courts increased by 11% (to 51,600) and 23% (to 24,000) respectively.
In Q1 2017, there were 39,900 completed service requests, an increase of 4% from the same quarter in 2016. Criminal courts made the greatest use of face-to-face language interpreter and translation services; 45% of completed service requests were for criminal cases (including Crown Court and magistrates courts completed cases), 36% were for tribunal cases, and 14% were for civil and family court cases. In comparison to Q1 2016, completed service requests for criminal courts have continued to decrease into Q1 2017, tribunals have continued to increase, whilst civil and family have returned to the same level.
In Q1 2017, 84% of all bookings were fulfilled, while 3% were unfulfilled and 13% were cancelled. Both fulfilled and unfulfilled bookings increased by one percentage point compared to Q1 2016, while the proportion of cancelled bookings decreased by one percentage point.
Success rate (Figure 6)
The success rate for completed service requests in 2016 was 96%, a 1 percentage point decrease compared to 2015.
In Q1 2017, the overall success rate was 97%, similar to the same quarter in 2016. Standard language requests had a success rate of 98%, similar to Q1 2016, whilst the success rate for rare language requests had decreased by 6 percentage points from 92% in Q1 2016 to 86% in Q1 2017. In contrast, the success rate of special services requests had increased by 7 percentage points from 93% in Q1 2016 to over 99% in Q1 2017. The number of complaints was higher in Q1 2017 compared to the same period in 2016
A total of 730 complaints for completed service requests were made in Q1 2017, compared to 440 in Q1 2016.
The total number of ‘off contract’ service requests increased between Q1 2016 and Q1 2017
The total number of ‘off contract’ service requests increased from 220 in Q1 2016 to 370 in Q1 2017.
Figure 28: Number of complaints and complaint rate, Q1 2013 to Q1 2017 (Source: Table L2)
Number of complaints and complaint rate (Figure 28)
The total number of complaints made in 2016 was similar to 2015. Although the total number of complaints remained at a similar level in the first three quarters of 2016, thereafter there was an increase from 430 in Q3 2016 to 740 in Q4 2016 and 730 in Q1 2017.
In Q1 2017 the complaint rate was just under 2%, compared to just over 1% in Q1 2016. However, the complaint rate is still lower compared to the start of the period under the old contract, 4% in 2013, and is broadly in line with complaint rates of two years ago when the complaint rate in each of the four quarters in 2014 was 2%. The most common cause of complaint in Q1 2017 was ‘Interpreter was late’ which accounted for 23% (170) of all complaints; this was also the most common cause of complaint in Q1 2016 (37%, 160). The complaint rate was highest in tribunals at just under 3% in Q1 2017, compared to just over 2% in Q1 2016, with the most common complaint being ‘interpreter was late’ (110). The complaint rate at criminal courts was just above 1% in Q1 2017 compared to just below 1% in Q1 2016. This is consistent with the proportion of ineffective trials from the criminal courts section for which interpreter availability is recorded as the reason for the trial being ineffective (2%).
**Off contract requests (Table L3)**
The number of ‘off contract’ service requests increased throughout 2016, with the largest increase of 49% between Q3 2016 (440 requests) and Q4 2016 (650 requests). This was followed by a decrease to 370 in Q1 2017.
‘Off contract’ requests at tribunals decreased from 310 in Q4 2016 to 200 in Q1 2017, accounting for 52% of all completed ‘off contract’ service requests for language interpreter and translation services in the latest quarter. Criminal courts accounted for 42% (160 requests), whilst civil & family courts accounted for 6% (20). Annex D: Further information on criminal courts data
The data presented in this publication are provisional. Final data for each calendar year is published in June each year in our Criminal Courts Statistics annual bulletin, following further data cleaning and the incorporation of additional cases not available in our original extracts of administrative data.
Accompanying files
As well as this bulletin, the following products are published as part of this release:
- Two technical guides providing background information on ‘Criminal Court Statistics’ and ‘Statistics on the use of languages and interpreters in courts and tribunals’, including data collection and processing, as well as relevant revisions policies and legislation.
- A set of overview tables, covering each section of this bulletin.
- A set of pivot tables containing Crown Court data broken down by offence group.
- 3 CSV files which feature court level breakdowns of published data:
- Criminal Courts listings transparency.
- Criminal Courts timeliness.
- Crown Court receipts, disposals and outstanding cases by offence group.
National Statistics status
National Statistics status means that official statistics meet the highest standards of trustworthiness, quality and public value.
All official statistics should comply with all aspects of the Code of Practice for Official Statistics. They are awarded National Statistics status following an assessment by the Authority’s regulatory arm. The Authority considers whether the statistics meet the highest standards of Code compliance, including the value they add to public decisions and debate.
It is the Ministry of Justice’s responsibility to maintain compliance with the standards expected for National Statistics. If we become concerned about whether these statistics are still meeting the appropriate standards, we will discuss any concerns with the Authority promptly. National Statistics status can be removed at any point when the highest standards are not maintained, and reinstated when standards are restored.
Contact
Press enquiries should be directed to the Ministry of Justice press office:
Tel: 020 3334 3536 Email: newsdesk@justice.gsi.gov.uk
Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the Ministry of Justice:
Head of Criminal Justice System Statistics Ministry of Justice, 102 Petty France, London, SW1H 9AJ Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
Next update: 28 September 2017
URL: www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-court-statistics-quarterly-October-to-December-2016
© Crown copyright Produced by the Ministry of Justice
Alternative formats are available on request from statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1639-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 24,
"total-input-tokens": 53997,
"total-output-tokens": 10959,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
2055,
1
],
[
2055,
3199,
2
],
[
3199,
4630,
3
],
[
4630,
6247,
4
],
[
6247,
9016,
5
],
[
9016,
10164,
6
],
[
10164,
12578,
7
],
[
12578,
13996,
8
],
[
13996,
14949,
9
],
[
14949,
16509,
10
],
[
16509,
17813,
11
],
[
17813,
18964,
12
],
[
18964,
19474,
13
],
[
19474,
20591,
14
],
[
20591,
22820,
15
],
[
22820,
24426,
16
],
[
24426,
25300,
17
],
[
25300,
26857,
18
],
[
26857,
27950,
19
],
[
27950,
29460,
20
],
[
29460,
31347,
21
],
[
31347,
32663,
22
],
[
32663,
33723,
23
],
[
33723,
36492,
24
]
]
} |
59a41785655114dc9990441121dffbc2303a81f6 | Criminal court statistics quarterly, England and Wales
July to September 2016
Ministry of Justice Statistics bulletin
Published 15 December 2016 Contents
Introduction 2
Changes and revisions in this publication 4
Key Findings 5
Criminal Courts 6
1. Criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts 6
2. Criminal cases in the Crown Court 7
3. Timeliness 12
Annex A: Enforcement of financial impositions 15
Annex B: List of Accompanying Tables and CSV 18
Annex C: Explanatory notes 21
Previous editions 22
Contacts 22 Introduction
The statistical bulletin
This publication presents statistics relating to activity in criminal cases in magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales. It provides provisional figures for the latest quarter (July to September 2016), with accompanying commentary and analysis. The figures themselves give a summary overview of the volume of cases dealt with by these courts over time. The statistics are used to monitor court workloads, to assist in the development of policy, and their subsequent monitoring and evaluation.
Information on the enforcement of financial impositions can be found in Annex A. The annex provides updated management information on the collection of financial impositions through Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS).
Criminal Courts; an overview
Magistrates’ courts
Virtually all criminal court cases start in the magistrates’ courts. The less serious offences are handled entirely in magistrates’ courts, with over 90% of all cases being dealt with in this way. The more serious offences are passed on to the Crown Court, either for sentencing after the defendant has been found guilty in the magistrates’ court, or for trial with a judge and jury.
As part of wider measures in the justice system, committal hearings were abolished nationally1 at the end of May 2013. As a result of the change, triable-either-way cases can now be sent straight to the Crown Court as soon as it is clear the matter is serious enough, rather than having to await a committal hearing.
The Crown Court
The Crown Court deals with cases received from the magistrates’ courts for sentencing, trial or appeal against magistrates’ courts’ decision. Of those proceeded against in the magistrates’ courts, around 5% of defendants go on to the Crown Court for trial.
Triable-either-way cases can be sent to the Crown Court for trial if the magistrates’ courts decide the matter is serious enough or if a defendant elects to be tried by judge and jury.
Indictable only cases can only be tried on indictment in the Crown Court as they cannot be heard summarily at the magistrates’ courts.
1 www.gov.uk/government/news/faster-justice-as-unneccessary-committal-hearings-are-abolished Committed for sentence cases are transferred to the Crown Court for sentencing only after a defendant has been convicted in a magistrates’ court. This would occur where a magistrate believes that their sentencing powers are insufficient to apply an appropriate sanction to the defendant.
In its appellate jurisdiction the Crown Court deals mainly with appeals against conviction and/or sentence in respect of criminal offences, including consequential orders, e.g. disqualification from driving, and against the making of certain standalone orders, e.g. Anti-Social Behaviour Orders. The Crown Court may dismiss or allow the appeal and vary all or any part of the sentence. Appeals are usually heard by a Circuit Judge sitting with no more than four lay magistrates (normally two).
**Average waiting time at the Crown Court**
‘Average waiting time’ is the time between sending a case to the Crown Court and the start of the substantive hearing.
**Average hearing time at the Crown Court**
The ‘average hearing time’ relates to the average duration of all hearings heard in the Crown Court, including preliminary hearings, main hearings, and hearings where a sentence is given to a defendant.
**Data and court processes**
Information about the systems and data included in this publication can be found in the ‘A guide to criminal court statistics’ which is published alongside this report. It also includes a glossary which provides brief definitions for the terms used in this report.
[www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-guide-to-criminal-court-statistics](http://www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-guide-to-criminal-court-statistics) Changes and revisions in this publication
Changes to timeliness methodology to remove 10 year threshold
All timeliness figures in this publication are based on new timeliness methodology which include cases with an offence to completion duration of over 10 years, as explained below.
Following a consultation in early 2015, a proposal was agreed to make changes to the end-to-end case timeliness methodology applied within this publication. The proposed change was to remove the 10 year threshold from the validation scripts applied to published estimates. In June 2016 we confirmed our intention to implement the changes and released the first set of tables as experimental statistics in the September 2016 bulletin.
In addition, Single Justice Procedure (SJP) cases were included within the statistics for the first time in the September bulletin. These cases were introduced in June 2015 and apply to adult only summary non imprisonable offences which can only be dealt with by magistrates’ courts.
In the September 2016 publication, tables based on both the existing and new experimental timeliness methodologies were published, along with a separate annex document providing users with a detailed explanation of the change in approach and comparisons between statistics produced under the two methodologies.
Following further scrutiny, a small number of changes have been made to the new methodology; SJP cases are now excluded if their offence duration was over 10 years or if the laying of information date was prior to 2014. The figures, based on the new methodology, have therefore been reproduced following the publication in September 2016 and are no longer classified as ‘experimental statistics’.
Additional magistrates’ courts timeliness tables – excluding cases committed to the Crown Court
Published timeliness tables at a national level for magistrates’ court cases in table T2 include cases committed to the Crown Court. The timeliness transparency file, however, only includes cases fully dealt with in the magistrates’ courts, thereby excluding cases committed to the Crown Court. For completeness, an additional national level magistrates’ court table has been produced (table T3) to present national timeliness statistics in the same way as the transparency file. This additional table therefore only includes cases fully dealt with at magistrates’ courts and exclude cases committed to the Crown Court; it is now part of the set of timeliness tables produced each quarter. Key Findings
This report presents statistics relating to activity in criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales in the third quarter of 2016 (July to September).
- Disposals in magistrates’ courts remain higher than receipts, resulting in the outstanding magistrates’ court caseload dropping to 281,600 at the end of Q3 2016, the lowest level in the time period reported.
- Outstanding cases in the Crown Court have been gradually decreasing since Q4 2014. Between Q2 2016 and Q3 2016 they declined by 5% to 41,800 cases, the lowest number of outstanding cases since Q1 2013.
- Over the last 12 months, for cases completing in the Crown Court, the average number of days from first listing to completion in the Crown Court decreased overall from 198 days in Q3 2015 to 193 days in Q3 2016.
- Hearing times for not guilty trials in the Crown Court have increased in the latest quarter to 14.5 hours in Q3 2016. Hearing times for guilty plea trials have remained fairly steady with a small increase to 1.7 hours into Q3 2016. Criminal Courts
At the third quarter of 2016, there were around 240 magistrates’ courts and approximately 75 Crown Court locations across England and Wales.
1. Criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts
Figure 1 below shows receipts, disposals and outstanding cases at magistrates’ courts in England and Wales.
**Figure 1: Magistrates’ courts caseload, Q2 2012 to Q3 2016**
Receipts in the magistrates’ courts (figure 1)
Receipts have been declining since the end of 2015, falling by 7% since the last quarter of 2015, and by 3% between Q2 2016 and Q3 2016.
Disposals (figure 1)
Following a peak of 412,400 disposals in Q1 2016, the number of disposals has been falling, decreasing by 3% from Q2 2016 to 386,500 in Q3 2016, the lowest number since Q2 2014. Despite the decline in disposals they continued to be higher than receipts.
Outstanding cases (figure 1)
Outstanding cases dropped to 281,600 cases at the end of Q3 2016, the lowest level in the time period reported, and a 4% decrease compared to Q2 2016. 2. Criminal cases in the Crown Court
Figure 2 below shows quarterly receipts, disposals and outstanding cases in Crown Court in England and Wales.
Figure 2: Crown Court caseload, Q1 2010 to Q3 2016
Receipts (figure 2)
Although receipts rose by 2% since the last quarter, they have been gradually declining since Q3 2013, decreasing by 8% between Q3 2015 and Q3 2016. This latest figure of 29,400 was the second lowest of the quarterly time series.
Disposals (figure 2)
Disposals have fallen by 3% in the last quarter to 31,500, with an overall decrease of 4% since Q3 2015. Despite this, disposals have continued to be higher than receipts for the last seven quarters, driving the falling trend in the number of outstanding cases.
Outstanding cases (figure 2)
Outstanding cases in the Crown Court have been gradually decreasing since Q4 2014. Between Q2 2016 and Q3 2016 they declined by 5% to 41,800 cases, the lowest number of outstanding cases since Q1 2013. Receipts by case type (figure 3)
Triable-either-way trial case receipts rose by 3% from Q2 2016, driving the overall trend in Crown Court receipts this quarter. Overall however, there was a downward trend in Triable-either-way receipts over the last twelve months, with a decrease of 17% between Q3 2015 and Q3 2016. Indictable only trial case receipts fell by 3% between Q2 2016 and Q3 2016, with an overall decrease of 7% since Q3 2015.
Committed for sentence and appeals receipts rose between Q2 2016 and Q3 2016 by 3% and 6%, respectively. Over a longer period, the number of committed for sentence receipts has increased by 3% since Q3 2015, while appeals have decreased by 2% over the same time period.
Figure 3: Crown Court receipts by case type, Q1 2010 to Q3 2016 **Disposals by case type** (figure 4)
Overall, triable-either-way disposals have been higher than receipts since Q1 2015, even though disposals decreased by 6% between Q2 2016 and Q3 2016. The number of indictable only disposals has also decreased by 6% over the same time period, from 7,900 in Q2 2016 to 7,500 in Q3 2016.
Committed for sentence disposals have increased by 8% since Q3 2015, whilst appeals have fluctuated since Q3 2015, with a small increase of 3% from Q2 2016.
**Figure 4: Crown Court disposals by case type, Q1 2010 to Q3 2016** Outstanding cases by case type (figure 5)
The trend in triable-either-way outstanding cases has driven the trend in the overall number of outstanding cases, with a decrease of 6% in the latest quarter and 26% between Q3 2015 and Q3 2016. This declining trend, seen since Q1 2015, has been driven by triable-either-way disposals being greater than corresponding receipts over this time period.
Indictable only cases have followed a similar pattern but to a lesser magnitude, decreasing by 4% in the latest quarter and by 14% between Q3 2015 and Q3 2016. Committed for sentence outstanding cases had remained fairly steady since Q2 2014 but have fallen by 3% in the latest quarter. Appeals have also declined in Q3 2016, by 4% compared to Q2 2016.
Figure 5: Crown Court outstanding cases by type, Q1 2010 to Q3 2016 Receipts, disposals and outstanding cases by offence group (figure 6)
In Q3 2016, violence against the person had the highest volume of receipts, followed by theft offences, drug offences and miscellaneous crimes against society.
For disposals, violence against the person had the highest number in Q3 2016 followed by drug offences, miscellaneous crimes against society and theft offences.
Outstanding cases followed a similar pattern, with violence against the person having the highest number of cases, followed by sexual offences and miscellaneous crimes against society. Although the number of disposals for sexual offences was higher than receipts in Q3 2016, the high number of outstanding cases may be due to the length of time these cases take to complete in comparison to other offence groups.
At Q3 2016, disposals were higher than receipts for each offence group, resulting in outstanding cases decreasing across each of the groups between Q2 and Q3 2016.
Figure 6: Crown Court receipts, disposals and outstanding cases by offence group, for trial cases, Q3 2016 3. Timeliness
Methodology notes
The statistics below are based on the revised end-to-end timeliness methodology, which were published for the first time as experimental statistics in the previous quarterly publication, published in September 2016. The figures now include cases where the total duration from offence to completion is greater than 10 years. Please see the Changes and revisions in this publication section of this bulletin for more details on changes to the timeliness methodology.
Offence to completion in the magistrates’ courts
For cases in the magistrates’ courts, the (mean) average number of days from offence to completion increased steadily from 156 days in Q3 2013 to 177 days in Q1 2016, but decreased to 173 days in Q3 2016.
Crown Court criminal cases - First listing in the magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court (figure 7)
Figure 7: Average number of days (mean) from first listing in the magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court, for Crown Court criminal cases, Q2 2010 to Q3 2016 The average number of days from first listing to completion in the Crown Court has increased from 185 days in Q1 2016 to 193 days in Q3 2016, although it’s still lower than the Q3 2015 level of 198 days.
The average time from first listing at the magistrates’ court to receipt by the Crown Court has remained fairly steady since late 2014, taking 6 days in Q3 2016.
The average time from receipt by the Crown Court to completion decreased from 193 days in Q3 2015 to 187 days in Q3 2016, driving the overall decrease in the number of days from first listing to completion over the last 12 months. In the latest quarter, however, the average time from receipt by the Crown Court to completion increased by 4 days from 183 days in Q2 2016.
**Average waiting times at the Crown Court** (figure 8)
Waiting times for triable-either-way cases have increased since the last quarter from 20.6 weeks in Q2 2016 to 20.9 weeks in Q3 2016, continuing the increasing trend seen since Q3 2013. Indictable only cases have decreased from 21.8 weeks in Q2 2016 to 21.4 weeks in Q3 2016, although they have increased overall since Q3 2013.
For non-trial cases, there was a small decrease of 0.3 weeks for committed for sentence cases, but a slightly larger decrease of 0.7 weeks for appeals; both have remained fairly stable over the time period reported.
**Figure 8: Average waiting time (weeks) at the Crown Court, Q1 2010 to Q3 2016** Average hearing times at the Crown Court (figure 9)
Hearing times for not guilty trials in the Crown Court fluctuated throughout 2014 and 2015 but, overall, they have increased by 1.8 hours from Q3 2015 to 14.5 hours in the latest quarter. Hearing times for guilty plea trials have remained fairly steady with a small increase to 1.7 hours into Q3 2016.
Figure 9: Average hearing time (hours) at the Crown Court, Q1 2010 to Q3 2016 Annex A: Enforcement of financial impositions
The following section provides updated management information on the collection of financial impositions through Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS). Impositions made in this time period are reported, and payment information will continue to be recorded.
Financial impositions are ordered by the criminal courts for payment by offenders at sentencing and include financial penalties such as fines, prosecutors’ costs, compensation orders and victim surcharge. Financial penalties are the most commonly used sentence and form a significant part of HMCTS’ collection and enforcement business. Accounting centres also enforce penalty notices for disorder and fixed penalty notices registered as fines for enforcement. The financial imposition statistics presented here do not include confiscation orders. Figure 10 shows the financial impositions for each quarter split by imposition type.
Figure 10: HMCTS management information: Financial impositions by imposition type, England and Wales, Q2 2011 to Q3 2016
Note: The Criminal Court Charge (CCC) ceased to exist on 24 December 2015 but impositions still appear due to when the data are entered onto the system. Financial penalties paid (Table A1)
Financial penalties can be imposed by the magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court; although they are all collected and enforced by the HMCTS National Compliance and Enforcement Service.
Overall there has been an increasing trend since Q2 2014 in the total value of financial penalties paid, regardless of the age of the imposition. Following a peak in Q2 2016 the total financial impositions fell by 15% to £100 million in Q3 2016, although this was a 9% increase when compared to Q3 2015.
Financial impositions and amounts paid by imposition type (Table A2, figure 10)
After the abolition of the ‘Criminal Courts Charge’ in December 2015 the total financial impositions have decreased from the peak of £176 million in Q4 2015 to £156 million in Q3 2016, an 11% decrease. In Q3 2016 the total financial impositions fell by 4% compared to Q2 2016, driven mainly by a decrease of £11.9 million in compensation. In earlier quarters the gradually increasing trend in fines since Q2 2014 was the main driver for increases in total impositions. Despite a decrease in total impositions, fines increased by 8% between Q2 2016 and Q3 2016, continuing the increasing trend with a 42% increase since Q3 2015.
In Q3 2016, 11% (£17.6 million) of all financial impositions imposed by the criminal courts were paid within the imposition month. This is a fall from Q2 2016 where we saw the highest amount imposed (£33.7m) and highest collection rate within the imposition month, which had been driven by an increase in compensation payments. There were a number of high value impositions for cases included within compensation, such as Health and Safety Executive cases during Q2 2016 which contributed to this high amount of compensation impositions.
Financial impositions (£ million) for victim surcharge (Table A2, figure 11)
Victim surcharge is an additional surcharge which is added to the fines that are imposed. The receipts obtained from the collection of these monies by HMCTS are passed to the Justice Policy Group of the MoJ to fund victims’ services. The amount imposed has been increasing since its scope and amounts payable were extended in October 2012.
Following a period of stability between Q1 2015 and Q4 2015, impositions increased at the start of 2016 and were 14% higher at Q3 2016 than at Q4 2015 although they were fairly stable in the last two quarters, Q2 2016 and Q3 2016. While the amount imposed has increased since 2015, the proportion of impositions collected within the imposition month has decreased from 11% in Q3 2015 to 9% in Q3 2016. Figure 11: Financial impositions (£ million) for victim surcharge, Q2 2011 to Q3 2016
Financial imposition accounts opened and closed (Table A3)
An account is opened when a financial penalty is ordered in court and is closed when the imposition against the account has been paid or the imposition ceases. Where a defendant has more than one financial penalty and/or account, these can be consolidated into one account.
There were 311,000 accounts opened in Q3 2016, a decrease of 4% since Q2 2016, and a decrease of 4% when compared to the same period in the previous year. Of the accounts opened in Q3 2016, 9% (27,300) were closed within the imposition month.
Outstanding financial impositions (Table A4)
The amount outstanding is irrespective of the age of the imposition or the payment terms, and excludes all impositions already paid as well as both legal and administrative cancellations. Payment terms may include arrangements for offenders to pay amounts owed over a period of time.
In Q3 2016, the total value of financial impositions outstanding in England and Wales was £747 million. The amount of outstanding financial impositions increased by 6% in the latest quarter, and has increased by 36% since Q1 2014. The increase since Q2 2015 is partially due to owed criminal court charge payments. Annex B: List of Accompanying Tables and CSV
Accompanying this publication are the following tables:
Table M1 Receipts, disposals and outstanding criminal cases in the magistrates' courts in England and Wales, annually 2012 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2012 – Q3 2016
Table M2 Effectiveness of magistrates' courts' trials in England and Wales, annually 2003 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016
Table M3 Key reasons for ineffective magistrates' courts' trials in England and Wales, annually 2006 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016
Table M4 Key reasons for cracked magistrates' courts' trials in England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016
Table C1 Receipts, disposals and outstanding cases in the Crown Court in England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016
Table C1a Receipts by offence group in the Crown Court in England and Wales, annual 2014 – 2015, quarterly Q1 2014 – Q3 2016
Table C1b Disposals by offence group in the Crown Court in England and Wales, annual 2014 – 2015, quarterly Q1 2014 – Q3 2016
Table C1c Outstanding cases by offence group in the Crown Court in England and Wales, annual 2014 – 2015, quarterly Q1 2014 – Q3 2016
Table C2 Effectiveness of Crown Court trials in England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016
Table C3 Key reasons for ineffective Crown Court trials in England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016
Table C4 Key reasons for cracked Crown Court trials in England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016
Table C5 Defendants dealt with in trial cases in the Crown Court by plea in England and Wales, annually 2001 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016
Table C6 Defendants dealt with in trial cases by stage at which guilty plea was entered and accepted in the Crown Court, by receipt type, England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016
Table C7 Defendants dealt with in trial cases where a guilty plea was entered before a trial, during trial or at a cracked trial, and accepted in the Crown Court, by receipt type, England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016
Table C8 Average waiting times in the Crown Court in England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016 | Table | Description | |-------|-------------| | C9 | Average waiting times (weeks) in the Crown Court for defendants dealt with in trial cases, by plea and remand type, England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016 | | C10 | Average hearing and waiting times for trial cases in the Crown Court by plea in England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016 | | C11 | Average hearing times (hours) in the Crown Court for cases disposed of, by case type and plea, England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016 | | C12 | Appeals (against decisions of magistrates' courts) dealt with in the Crown Court, by appeal type and result, England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016 | | T1 | Average number of days from offence to completion, percentage of proceedings completed at first listing and average number of hearings for criminal cases at the magistrates' courts by initial plea, England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q3 2016 | | T2 | Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all criminal cases at the magistrates' courts including those committed to the Crown Court, annually 2010 – 2015, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q3 2016 | | T3 | Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all criminal cases at the magistrates' courts, excluding those committed to the Crown Court, annually 2010 – 2015, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q3 2016 | | T4 | Average number of days taken from offence to completion for Crown Court criminal cases in England and Wales, annually 2010 – 2015, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q3 2016 | | T5 | Average number of days taken from offence to completion for criminal cases, annually 2010 – 2015, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q3 2016 | | T6 | Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all criminal cases by offence group, annually 2011 – 2015, quarterly Q3 2015 and Q3 2016 | | A1 | Enforcement of financial penalties in the magistrates' courts, England and Wales, annually 2004 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2016 | | A2 | HMCTS management information: Financial impositions and amounts paid by imposition type, England and Wales, annual 2011 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2011 – Q3 2016 | | A3 | HMCTS management information: Number of financial imposition accounts opened and closed, annually 2011 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2011 – Q3 2016 | | A4 | HMCTS management information: Total amount of financial impositions outstanding, annually 2011 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2011 – Q3 2016 | There are also a number of csv files that support this publication, these include:
- National and court level workload activity and case progression data
- National and court level timeliness data
- National and court level workload data by offence group Annex C: Explanatory notes
The United Kingdom Statistics Authority has designated these statistics as National Statistics, in accordance with the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007 and signifying compliance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics. Designation can be broadly interpreted to mean that the statistics:
- meet identified user needs;
- are well explained and readily accessible;
- are produced according to sound methods, and
- are managed impartially and objectively in the public interest.
Once statistics have been designated as National Statistics, it is a statutory requirement that the Code of Practice shall continue to be observed.
The statistics in this bulletin relate to cases in the magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales. Calendar year statistics are also provided.
Breakdowns of many of the summary figures presented in this bulletin, such as split by court or by HMCTS area, are available in the Comma Separated Value (CSV) files that accompany this publication.
Revisions
The statistics in the latest quarter are provisional, and are therefore liable to revision to take account of any late amendments to the administrative databases from which these statistics are sourced. The standard process for revising the published statistics to account for these late amendments is as follows:
- An initial revision to the statistics for the latest quarter may be made when the next edition of this bulletin is published. Further revisions may be made when the figures are reconciled at the end of the year. If revisions are needed in the subsequent year this will be clearly annotated in the tables.
For more information please see the Guide to criminal court statistics.
Symbols and conventions
The following symbols have been used throughout the tables in this bulletin:
.. = Not applicable
- = Not available 0 = Nil (r) = Revised data (p) = Provisional data Previous editions
Previous editions of Court Statistics Quarterly can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/court-statistics-quarterly#court-statistics-quarterly-reports
Future publication
The next publication of Criminal court statistics quarterly is scheduled to be published on 30 March 2017, covering the period October to December 2016. Following a consultation on the statistical release, “Use of language interpreter and translation services in courts and tribunals”, statistics on the use of interpreter and translation services will now be included in the Criminal court statistics quarterly, from March 2017 onwards.
Contacts
Press enquiries on the contents of this bulletin should be directed to the Ministry of Justice or Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS) press offices:
Ministry of Justice News Desk Tel: 020 3334 3536 Email: newsdesk@justice.gsi.gov.uk
Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the Ministry of Justice:
Annie Sorbie Ministry of Justice 102 Petty France London SW1H 9AJ Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
General enquiries about the statistics work of the Ministry of Justice can be emailed to statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
General information about the official statistics system of the UK is available from www.statistics.gov.uk
Feedback
The structure and content of this report is continually being reviewed to reflect user requirements. If you have any feedback about these changes, or the report more generally, please contact the production team through the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the Ministry of Justice:
Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1640-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 24,
"total-input-tokens": 50633,
"total-output-tokens": 8647,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
148,
1
],
[
148,
524,
2
],
[
524,
2757,
3
],
[
2757,
4405,
4
],
[
4405,
6909,
5
],
[
6909,
7978,
6
],
[
7978,
9000,
7
],
[
9000,
9970,
8
],
[
9970,
10746,
9
],
[
10746,
11299,
10
],
[
11299,
12116,
11
],
[
12116,
13196,
12
],
[
13196,
14238,
13
],
[
14238,
15664,
14
],
[
15664,
16098,
15
],
[
16098,
17324,
16
],
[
17324,
19923,
17
],
[
19923,
21235,
18
],
[
21235,
23538,
19
],
[
23538,
26094,
20
],
[
26094,
26350,
21
],
[
26350,
28286,
22
],
[
28286,
30037,
23
],
[
30037,
30037,
24
]
]
} |
bb51d663ee496a97679b30558c86cf56aa3330ae | Contents
Introduction 2 Changes and revisions in this publication 4 Key findings 5 Criminal Courts 6
1. Criminal cases in the magistrates' courts 6
2. Criminal cases in the Crown Court 7
3. Timeliness 10 Annex A: Enforcement of financial impositions 13 Annex B: List of accompanying tables and CSV 16 Annex C: Explanatory notes 18 Previous editions 19 Contacts 19 Introduction
The statistical bulletin
This is the fifth edition of the statistical bulletin, Criminal court statistics quarterly (CCSQ) presenting statistics relating to activity in criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales. These statistics were previously published within Court Statistics Quarterly which, after consultation, has been split into separate policy focused publications.
The publication provides provisional figures for the latest quarter (July to September 2015) with accompanying commentary and analysis. The figures themselves give a summary overview of the volume of cases dealt with by these courts over time. The statistics are used to monitor court workloads, to assist in the development of policy, and their subsequent monitoring and evaluation.
Information on the enforcement of financial impositions can be found in Annex A. Figures on the criminal courts charge, introduced on 13 April 2015, are separately identified within the publication for the first time. The annex provides updated management information on the collection of financial imposition through Her Majesty's Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS).
Criminal Courts; an overview
Magistrates’ courts
Virtually all criminal court cases start in the magistrates’ courts. The less serious offences are handled entirely in magistrates’ courts, with over 90% of all cases being dealt with in this way. The more serious offences are passed on to the Crown Court, either for sentencing after the defendant has been found guilty in the magistrates’ court, or for trial with a judge and jury.
As part of wider measures in the justice system, committal hearings were abolished nationally(^1) at the end of May 2013. As a result of the change, triable-either-way cases can now be sent straight to the Crown Court as soon as it is clear the matter is serious enough, rather than having to await a committal hearing.
The Crown Court
The Crown Court deals with cases received from the magistrates’ courts for sentencing, trial or appeal against magistrates’ courts’ decision.
Of those proceeded against in the magistrates’ courts, 7% of defendants are sent to the Crown Court for trial.
(^1) [www.gov.uk/government/news/faster-justice-as-unneccessary-committal-hearings-are-abolished](http://www.gov.uk/government/news/faster-justice-as-unneccessary-committal-hearings-are-abolished) Triable-either-way cases can be sent to the Crown Court for trial if the magistrates’ courts decide the matter is serious enough or if a defendant elects to be tried by judge and jury.
Indictable only cases can only be tried on indictment in the Crown Court as they cannot be heard summarily at the magistrates’ courts.
Committed for sentence cases are transferred to the Crown Court for sentencing only after a defendant has been convicted in a magistrates’ court. This would occur where a magistrate believes that their sentencing powers are insufficient to apply an appropriate sanction to the defendant.
In its appellate jurisdiction the Crown Court deals mainly with appeals against conviction and/or sentence in respect of criminal offences, including consequential orders, e.g. disqualification from driving, and against the making of certain stand alone orders, e.g. Anti-Social Behaviour Orders. The Crown Court may dismiss or allow the appeal and vary all or any part of the sentence. Appeals are usually heard by a Circuit Judge sitting with no more than four lay magistrates (normally two).
**Average waiting time at the Crown Court**
‘Average waiting time’ is the time between sending a case to the Crown Court and the start of the substantive hearing.
**Average hearing time at the Crown Court**
The ‘average hearing time’ relates to the average duration of all hearings heard in the Crown Court, including preliminary hearings, main hearings, and hearings where a sentence is given to a defendant.
**Data and court processes**
Information about the systems and data included in this publication can be found in the ‘A guide to criminal court statistics’ which is published alongside this report. It also includes a glossary which provides brief definitions for the terms used in this report.
[www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-guide-to-criminal-court-statistics](http://www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-guide-to-criminal-court-statistics) Changes and revisions in this publication
Inclusion of criminal court charge within enforcement tables (Annex A)
The criminal courts charge, which came into force on 13 April 2015, has been included as a separate entity for the first time within this CCSQ release. It applies only to offences committed from that date onwards, and therefore data are currently available for Q2 and Q3 2015.
The last CCSQ covered the period April to June 2015 and Table A2 included the following imposition types: compensation, costs, fine, victims surcharge and ‘other’. Other included vehicle excise back duty, vehicle excise arrears and forfeited recognisance. It also included criminal court charge which is now shown as a separate breakdown. Key Findings
This report presents statistics relating to activity in criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales in the third quarter of 2015 (July to September).
- At magistrates’ courts, the number of disposals at Q3 2015 continues to remain higher than receipts. Outstanding cases have continued to decrease since Q1 2015.
- Following a steady increase in the number of outstanding cases in the Crown Court from Q1 2013, there has been a decrease since Q4 2014. This reflects that Crown Court receipts have been declining, with a decrease of 9% from the same quarter in the previous year, whilst the number of disposals continues to remain higher than receipts.
- For Crown Court cases, the mean time from first listing at the magistrates’ court to receipt by the Crown Court fell substantially, from 22 days in Q2 2013 to 5 days in Q3 2014 and has remained consistent since then.
- Time from receipt by the Crown Court to main hearing and main hearing to completion have increased, resulting in the overall number of days from first listing to completion increasing from 164 to 204 days between Q3 2013 and Q2 2015, although there has been a small decrease to 195 days in Q3 2015.
- Across a two-year period, average waiting times for triable-either-way cases and indictable only cases have increased by 6.6 weeks and 4.9 weeks respectively. Waiting times have remained fairly steady in non-trial cases. Criminal Courts
At the end of the fourth quarter of 2014, there were around 240 magistrates’ courts and approximately 80 Crown Court locations across England and Wales.
1. Criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts
Figure 1 below shows the magistrates’ courts caseload for England and Wales.
Figure 1: Magistrates’ courts caseload, Q2 2012 to Q3 2015
Receipts in the magistrates’ courts (figure 1)
Following a rise in receipts in the magistrates' courts between Q3 2013 and Q1 2014, receipts remained stable up to early 2015. Since Q1 2015 however, receipts have decreased by 2%.
Disposals (figure 1)
Disposals have fluctuated since 2013 and indicate a slight rise overall more recently; in Q3 2015 there was a 2% increase when compared to the same quarter in 2014, and a 3% increase compared to Q2 2015. The number of disposals at Q3 2015 has been higher than receipts for the last two quarters. Outstanding cases (figure 1)
The number of outstanding cases rose in late 2013 and into 2015, with an overall increase of 11% between Q3 2013 and Q3 2015, although there are signs of a decrease since the start of 2015.
2. Criminal cases in the Crown Court
Figure 2 below shows the Crown Court caseload for England and Wales.
Figure 2: Crown Court caseload, Q1 2010 to Q3 2015
Receipts in the Crown Court (figure 2)
Following a peak in the number of cases received by the Crown Court in Q3 2013, there has been a downward trend in the overall number of receipts in the subsequent time periods until Q2 2015. They have remained at around 32,000 cases into Q3 2015, a decrease of 13% since the peak at Q3 2013. Receipts by case type (figure 3)
Triable-either-way cases increased throughout 2013, steadied in early 2014 and then decreased by 11% between Q3 2014 and Q2 2015. Figures for Q3 2015 have remained at a similar level to Q2 2015 but are still higher than early 2013.
There have been downward trends in receipts for indictable only cases over the last couple of years, representing a decrease of 20% between Q3 2013 and Q3 2015. Cases committed for sentence meanwhile decreased by 14% over the same period. There was, however, a rise of 5% for cases committed for sentence from the previous quarter, the first rise since Q1 2014.
Figure 3: Crown Court receipts by case type, Q1 2010 to Q3 2015
Disposals in the Crown Court (figure 2)
Disposals remained fairly steady in late 2012 and 2013 before increasing across 2014 until the peak in early 2015. Disposals have decreased in recent quarters and at Q3 2015 are at the same level as Q1 2014.
Disposals by case type (figure 4)
Disposals of triable-either-way cases have increased by 16% since Q3 2013 but have decreased by 7% since Q1 2015. Indictable only disposals remained relatively stable throughout both these time periods, but are showing signs of decrease, with figures at Q3 2015 being the lowest across the time series. Outstanding cases in the Crown Court (figure 2)
There were 51,117 outstanding cases in the Crown Court in Q3 2015, a decrease of 8% from Q4 2014. This decline reflects the number of disposals being higher than receipts over the last three quarters.
Outstanding cases by case type (figure 5)
The trend in triable-either-way outstanding cases has followed a similar trend to the overall number of outstanding cases, with a substantial increase from Q1 2013 up to Q4 2014 followed by a declining trend thereafter. Overall this represents an increase of 62% since the first quarter of 2013, but a decrease of 7% since Q1 2015.
Outstanding indictable only cases also increased after Q1 2013 but declined by 10% from Q3 2014. 3. Timeliness
**Offence to completion in the magistrates’ courts**
For cases dealt with entirely in the magistrates’ courts, the number of days from offence to completion increased overall from 149 days to 158 days in the 12 months to Q3 2015.
**Crown Court criminal cases - First listing in the magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court** (figure 6)
For cases committed for trial at the Crown Court, the mean time from first listing at the magistrates’ court to receipt by the Crown Court fell substantially, from 22 days in Q2 2013 to 5 days in Q3 2014, and has remained consistent since then.
However, time from receipt by the Crown Court to main hearing and main hearing to completion have increased, resulting in the overall number of days from first listing to completion increasing from 164 to 204 days between Q3 2013 and Q2 2015, although there has been a small decrease to 195 days in Q3 2015. Average waiting times at Crown Court (figure 7)
Average waiting times increased for all trial cases between Q3 2013 and Q2 2015, but showed a slight decrease in Q3 2015 for indictable only cases. Across a two-year period, triable-either-way cases and indictable only cases have increased overall by 6.6 weeks and 4.9 weeks respectively. Waiting times have remained fairly steady in non-trial cases. Average hearing times at Crown Court (figure 8)
Since Q1 2014, the trend in average hearing times for not guilty plea trials has slowly increased, whereas for guilty plea trials they have remained steady. At Q3 2015, the average hearing time for trials involving a not guilty plea was 14.1 hours.
Figure 8: Average hearing time (hours) at the Crown Court, Q1 2010 to Q3 2015 Annex A: Enforcement of financial impositions
The following section provides updated management information on the collection of financial impositions through Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS). For the first time, figures on criminal courts charge are shown separately. Following the announcement by the Secretary of State for Justice on 3 December this charge will cease to be imposed from 24 December 2015. This bulletin will continue to record impositions up to that date and anything owed and collected thereafter.
Financial impositions are ordered by the criminal courts for payment by offenders at sentencing and include financial penalties such as fines, prosecutors’ costs, compensation orders and victim surcharge. Financial penalties are the most commonly used sentence and form a significant part of HMCTS’ collection and enforcement business. Accounting centres also enforce penalty notices for disorder and fixed penalty notices registered as fines for enforcement. The financial imposition statistics presented here do not include confiscation orders.
Figure 9 shows the total fines for each quarter split by imposition type.
Figure 9: HMCTS management information: Financial impositions and amounts paid by imposition type, England and Wales, Q2 2011 - Q3 2015 Financial impositions and amounts paid (Table A1)
Financial penalties can be imposed by the magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court; however they are all collected and enforced by the HMCTS National Compliance and Enforcement Service.
In Q3 2015, the total value of financial penalties paid, regardless of the age of the imposition, was £91 million; a 20% increase when compared with the same quarter in 2014, and a 6% increase since Q1 2015.
Financial impositions and amounts paid by imposition type (Table A2)
The total value of impositions in Q3 2015 (£149.5 million) increased by 20% when compared to Q2 2015. This is mainly due to the implementation of the criminal courts charge, which was introduced in April 2015. In Q3 2015, 10% (£15.2 million) of all financial impositions imposed by the criminal courts were paid within the imposition month.
In Q2 2015, the first quarter showing the criminal courts charge, £5.7 million was imposed, compared to £22 million in Q3 2015. Within the first month of imposition at Q3 2015, 4% of the charge was collected.
Financial impositions (£ million) for victim surcharge (Table A2)
Victim surcharge is an additional surcharge which is added to the fines that are imposed. The receipts obtained from the collection of these monies by HMCTS are passed to the Justice Policy Group of the MoJ to fund victims’ services. The amount imposed has been increasing since its scope and amounts payable were extended in October 2012(^2). The increases seen have slowed and stabilised at this higher level from 2014, with the proportion of impositions collected within one month of imposition at around 11%.
Each year there are a number of financial penalties that are cancelled, either administratively or legally. Legal cancellations can be applied after the case has been reconsidered by a judge or a magistrate and may follow a change in circumstances. Administrative cancellations are only applied in accordance with a strict write off policy, e.g. where the defendant has not been traced; these can then be re-instated if the defendant is then traced.
(^2) [www.gov.uk/government/publications/victim-surcharge-circular-october-2012](http://www.gov.uk/government/publications/victim-surcharge-circular-october-2012) Financial imposition accounts opened and closed (Table A3)
An account is opened when a financial penalty is ordered in court and is closed when the imposition against the account has been paid or the imposition is cancelled. Where a defendant has more than one financial penalty and/or account, these can be consolidated into one account.
There were 325,603 accounts opened in Q3 2015, an increase of 3% when compared to the same period in the previous year. Of the accounts opened in Q3 2015, 9% (29,679) were closed within the month of imposition.
Outstanding financial impositions (Table A4)
The amount outstanding is irrespective of the age of the imposition or the payment terms, and excludes all impositions already paid as well as both legal and administrative cancellations. Payment terms may include arrangements for offenders to pay amounts owed over a period of time.
In Q3 2015, the total value of financial impositions outstanding in England and Wales was £624 million. Although they had been decreasing from April 2011 they have been increasing since the beginning of 2014, and show an increase of 12% since Q3 2014. Annex B: List of Accompanying Tables and CSV
Accompanying this publication are the following tables:
Table M1 Receipts, disposals and outstanding criminal cases in the magistrates' courts in England and Wales, annually 2012 - 2014, quarterly Q2 2012 – Q3 2015
Table M2 Effectiveness of magistrates' courts' trials in England and Wales, annually 2003 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table M3 Key reasons for ineffective magistrates' courts' trials in England and Wales, annually 2006 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table M4 Key reasons for cracked magistrates' courts' trials in England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table C1 Receipts, disposals and outstanding cases in the Crown Court in England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table C2 Effectiveness of Crown Court trials in England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table C3 Key reasons for ineffective Crown Court trials in England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table C4 Key reasons for cracked Crown Court trials in England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table C5 Defendants dealt with in trial cases in the Crown Court by plea in England and Wales, annually 2001 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table C6 Defendants dealt with in trial cases by stage at which guilty plea was entered and accepted in the Crown Court, by receipt type, England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table C7 Defendants dealt with in trial cases where a guilty plea was entered before a trial, during trial or at a cracked trial, and accepted in the Crown Court, by receipt type, England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table C8 Average waiting times in the Crown Court in England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table C9 Average waiting times (weeks) in the Crown Court for defendants dealt with in trial cases, by plea and remand type, England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table C10 Average hearing and waiting times for trial cases in the Crown Court by plea in England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table C11 Average hearing times (hours) in the Crown Court for cases disposed of, by case type and plea, England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015 Table C12 Appeals (against decisions of magistrates’ courts) dealt with in the Crown Court, by appeal type and result, England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table T1 Average number of days from offence to completion, percentage of proceedings completed at first listing and average number of hearings for criminal cases at the magistrates' courts by initial plea, England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2014, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q3 2015
Table T2 Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all criminal cases at the magistrates' courts in England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2014, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q3 2015
Table T3 Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all summary cases at the magistrates' courts in England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2014, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q3 2015
Table T4 Average number of days taken from offence to completion for Crown Court criminal cases in England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2014, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q3 2015
Table T5 Average number of days taken from offence to completion for criminal cases in England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2014, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q3 2015
Table T6 Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all criminal cases by offence group, in England and Wales, Q4 2013 and Q3 2015
Table A1 Enforcement of financial penalties in the magistrates' courts, England and Wales, annually 2004 - 2014, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q3 2015
Table A2 HMCTS management information: Financial impositions and amounts paid by imposition type, England and Wales, annual 2011 - 2014, quarterly Q2 2011 – Q3 2015
Table A3 HMCTS management information: Number of financial imposition accounts opened and closed, annually 2011 - 2014, quarterly Q2 2011 – Q3 2015
Table A4 HMCTS management information: Total amount of financial impositions outstanding, annually 2011 - 2014, quarterly Q2 2011 – Q3 2015
There are also a number of csv files that support this publication, these include:
- National and court level workload activity and case progression data
- National and court level timeliness data Annex C: Explanatory notes
The United Kingdom Statistics Authority has designated these statistics as National Statistics, in accordance with the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007 and signifying compliance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics. Designation can be broadly interpreted to mean that the statistics:
- meet identified user needs;
- are well explained and readily accessible;
- are produced according to sound methods, and
- are managed impartially and objectively in the public interest.
Once statistics have been designated as National Statistics, it is a statutory requirement that the Code of Practice shall continue to be observed.
The statistics in this bulletin relate to cases in the magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales. Calendar year statistics are also provided.
Breakdowns of many of the summary figures presented in this bulletin, such as split by court or by HMCTS area, are available in the Comma Separated Value (CSV) files that accompany this publication.
Revisions
The statistics in the latest quarter are provisional, and are therefore liable to revision to take account of any late amendments to the administrative databases from which these statistics are sourced. The standard process for revising the published statistics to account for these late amendments is as follows:
- An initial revision to the statistics for the latest quarter may be made when the next edition of this bulletin is published. Further revisions may be made when the figures are reconciled at the end of the year. If revisions are needed in the subsequent year this will be clearly annotated in the tables.
For more information please see the Guide to criminal court statistics.
Symbols and conventions
The following symbols have been used throughout the tables in this bulletin:
- .. = Not applicable
- - = Not available
- 0 = Nil
- (r) = Revised data
- (p) = Provisional data Previous editions
Previous editions of Court Statistics Quarterly can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/court-statistics-quarterly#court-statistics-quarterly-reports
Future publication
The next publication of Criminal court statistics quarterly is scheduled to be published on 31 March 2016, covering the period October to December 2015.
Contacts
Press enquiries on the contents of this bulletin should be directed to the Ministry of Justice or Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS) press offices:
Ministry of Justice News Desk Tel: 020 3334 3536 Email: newsdesk@justice.gsi.gov.uk
Mark Kram (HMCTS) Tel: 020 3334 6697 Email: mark.kram@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the Ministry of Justice:
David Jagger Ministry of Justice 102 Petty France London SW1H 9AJ Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
General enquiries about the statistics work of the Ministry of Justice can be emailed to statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
General information about the official statistics system of the UK is available from www.statistics.gov.uk
Feedback
The structure and content of this report is continually being reviewed to reflect user requirements. If you have any feedback about these changes, or the report more generally, please contact the production team through the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the Ministry of Justice:
Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1641-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 21,
"total-input-tokens": 33751,
"total-output-tokens": 7163,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
0,
1
],
[
0,
365,
2
],
[
365,
2782,
3
],
[
2782,
4753,
4
],
[
4753,
5485,
5
],
[
5485,
6938,
6
],
[
6938,
7842,
7
],
[
7842,
8556,
8
],
[
8556,
9839,
9
],
[
9839,
10563,
10
],
[
10563,
11483,
11
],
[
11483,
11883,
12
],
[
11883,
12260,
13
],
[
12260,
13557,
14
],
[
13557,
15824,
15
],
[
15824,
16960,
16
],
[
16960,
19408,
17
],
[
19408,
21531,
18
],
[
21531,
23477,
19
],
[
23477,
25015,
20
],
[
25015,
25015,
21
]
]
} |
793b6c005071132c836ac222c23fc441a775bb22 | Criminal court statistics quarterly, England and Wales, July to September 2017
Including statistics on the use of language interpreter and translation services in courts and tribunals
Main points
Outstanding cases in magistrates’ courts are at a similar level to Q2 2017
Despite receipts being slightly higher than disposals in Q3 2017, the number of outstanding cases remained fairly similar to the previous quarter, at 285,000 in Q3 2017.
Outstanding cases in the Crown Court have fallen
Disposals remained higher than receipts in the quarter, continuing to drive the decrease in outstanding cases to 38,700, the lowest number in the quarterly time series.
Despite decreasing, violence against the person still had the highest number of outstanding cases
In Q3 2017 the number of outstanding violence against the person cases decreased to 7,400, whilst continuing to have the highest volume of receipts, disposals and outstanding cases.
The average number of days from first listing to completion in the Crown Court has decreased
For cases completing in the Crown Court, the average number of days from first listing to completion in the Crown Court decreased from 174 days in Q2 2017 to 172 days in Q3 2017.
Total financial impositions have decreased
Total financial impositions have decreased by 12% in the latest quarter, mostly driven by the decrease in fines following one high imposition in Q2 2017.
Interpreters: The success rate of completed requests remained stable
The success rate for completed service requests was 98% in Q3 2017, the same as the previous quarter.
The technical guide to Criminal court statistics can be found here: www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-guide-to-criminal-court-statistics
For full and detailed commentary please refer to the annual publication: www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-court-statistics-quarterly-january-to-march-2017
We are changing how our quarterly bulletins look, and would welcome any feedback to commentary.champions@justice.gsi.gov.uk
For other feedback related to the content of this publication, please let us know at CJS_Statistics@justice.gsi.gov.uk
1. Criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts
Outstanding cases in magistrates’ courts are at a similar level to Q2 2017
Despite receipts being slightly higher than disposals in Q3 2017, the number of outstanding cases remained fairly similar to the previous quarter, at 285,000 in Q3 2017.
Figure 1: Magistrates’ courts caseload, Q2 2012 to Q3 2017 (Source: Table M1)
Magistrates’ court caseload (Figure 1)
In the latest quarter the total number of receipts increased slightly from 375,300 in Q2 2017 to 376,900 in Q3 2017. This is a similar level of receipts to Q3 2016 (377,600).
Disposals have decreased slightly in the latest quarter, falling by 1% to 375,600 in Q3 2017. Overall disposals have decreased by 3% since Q3 2016.
Despite the number of receipts becoming slightly higher than disposals in Q3 2017 the number of outstanding cases have remained similar to Q2 2017. Overall the total number of outstanding cases has increased by around 1% since Q3 2016. 2. Criminal cases in the Crown Court
Outstanding cases in Crown Court have fallen
Disposals remained higher than receipts in the quarter, continuing to drive the decrease in outstanding cases to 38,700, the lowest number in the quarterly time series.
Figure 2: Crown Court caseload, Q1 2009 to Q3 2017 (Source: Table C1)
Receipts (Figure 2)
Receipts have fallen by 3% since Q2 2017 and overall by 5% since Q3 2016. Receipts for triable-either-way cases have seen a reduction of 8% since Q2 2017, while receipts for indictable only cases have decreased by 2% in the same time period.
Disposals (Figure 2)
Disposals remained fairly stable at around 29,500 between Q2 2017 and Q3 2017, but have decreased by 5% since Q3 2016. In the latest quarter, triable-either-way disposals and indictable only disposals fell by 3% and 1% respectively.
Outstanding (Figure 2)
Outstanding cases in the Crown Court have gradually decreased since Q4 2014, mainly due to disposals remaining higher than receipts since Q1 2015. Overall outstanding cases have declined by 10% since Q3 2016, and in the latest quarter they have declined by 4% to 38,700 cases, the lowest number in the quarterly time series.
The driver of this declining trend has been triable-either-way cases, which have fallen by 5% in the latest quarter and 15% since Q3 2016. Indictable only cases followed a similar pattern but to a lesser magnitude, decreasing by 1% in the latest quarter and by 5% between Q3 2016 and Q3 2017. 3. Receipts, disposals and outstanding cases in the Crown Court by offence group
Violence against the person still had the highest number of outstanding cases
In Q3 2017 the number of outstanding violence against the person cases decreased from 7,700 in Q2 2017 to 7,400 in Q3 2017, whilst continuing to have the highest volume of receipts, disposals and outstanding cases.
Figure 3: Outstanding cases by offence group, for trial cases, Q1 2010 - Q3 2017 (Source: Pivot table 1)
Crown Court receipts, disposals and outstanding cases by offence group (Figure 3)
Violence against the person had the highest number of receipts, at 3,700 in Q3 2017. Disposals for violence against the person cases (4,000) continued to be higher than receipts in Q3 2017 driving the 4% decline in outstanding cases in the latest quarter. Outstanding cases for violence against the person have declined since Q2 2015 (10,400), and are at their lowest level since Q1 2013, now standing at 7,400 in Q3 2017.
Despite sexual offences having the fifth highest number of both receipts and disposals, at 2,000 and 2,300 respectively, they had the second largest number of outstanding cases. In Q3 2017 there were 5,100 outstanding sexual offence cases, a decrease of 6% from 5,400 cases in the previous quarter. This large number of outstanding cases for sexual offences could be related to their longer average number of days from first listing to completion, when compared to other offences.
The number of outstanding cases for sexual offences peaked in Q1 2016 at 6,600 cases and have been decreasing since; by the end of Q3 2017 the number of outstanding sexual offence cases were at the lowest level since Q3 2013. 4. Timeliness
The average number of days from first listing in the magistrates’ court to completion in the Crown Court has decreased
For cases completing in the Crown Court the average number of days from first listing to completion in the Crown Court decreased from 174 days in Q2 2017 to 172 days in Q3 2017.
Average hearing times for not guilty plea trials was 17.3 hours in Q3 2017
Average hearing times for not guilty plea trials in the Crown Court increased from 14.9 hours in Q2 2017 to 17.3 hours in Q3 2017, the highest level in the quarterly time series. Hearing times for guilty plea trials remained stable at 1.7 hours in the latest quarter (table C7).
Figure 4: Average number of days (mean) from first listing in the magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court, for Crown Court criminal cases, Q2 2010 to Q3 2017 (Source: Table T4)
Crown Court criminal cases - First listing in the magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court (Figure 4)
The decrease in time from sending to the Crown Court to main hearing has driven the overall decrease in first listing to completion in the Crown Court, decreasing by 2 days from 123 days in Q2 2017 to 121 days in Q3 2017. The average time from first listing at the magistrates’ court to completion at the magistrates’ court increased from 6 days in Q2 2017 to 7 days in Q3 2017, whilst the time from main hearing to completion in the Crown court remained similar at 44 days in Q3 2017. Annex A: Enforcement of financial impositions
Total financial impositions have decreased in the latest quarter
Total financial impositions have decreased by 12% in Q3 2017, mostly driven by a decrease in fines following one high imposition in Q2 2017.
Figure 5: HMCTS management information: Financial impositions by imposition type, England and Wales, Q2 2011 – Q3 2017 (Source: Table A2)
Financial impositions and amounts paid by imposition type (Figure 5, table A2)
Between Q2 2017 and Q3 2017 total financial impositions decreased by 12% to £161 million in Q3 2017. This decrease was mostly driven by a decrease in fine impositions of £20.6m, following one large fine of £20m imposed in Q2 2017. Overall since Q3 2016 total financial impositions increased by 4%, from £156m in Q3 2016.
In Q3 2017, 9% (£14.5m) of all criminal court financial impositions were paid within the imposition month, a similar level to the collection rate of Q2 2017 (just over 9%). Since Q3 2016 the collection rate of impositions collected within the imposition month has fallen by 2 percentage points from 11% in Q3 2016 to 9% in the latest quarter.
Outstanding financial impositions (Table A4)
In Q3 2017, the total value of financial impositions outstanding in England and Wales was £935 m. The amount of outstanding financial impositions has been increasing since Q1 2014, and showed an increase of £188m (25%) between Q3 2016 and Q3 2017. Annex B: The use of language interpreter and translation services in courts and tribunals
The total number of completed service requests decreased slightly in Q3 2017
A total of 37,000 completed service requests for language interpreter and translation services were made in Q3 2017, a 2% decrease compared to Q2 2017.
The success rate of completed service requests remained at 98%
Although the overall success rate stayed the same in Q3 2017, the success rate varied across different service types.
Figure 6: Number of completed language service requests and overall success rate, Q1 2013 to Q3 2017 (Source: Table L1)
Completed service requests (Table L1)
The figures comprise data from two separate suppliers, thebigword Group Ltd for face to face interpretation, and Clarion UK Ltd for non-spoken languages (special services). In Q3 2017, criminal courts made the greatest use of face-to-face language interpreter and translation services at 43%, whilst 34% were for tribunal cases, 16% were for civil and family court cases, and 6% of requests were for other cases.
Success rate (Figure 6)
Since Q2 2017, the success rate for standard language requests remained at 98%, whilst for “rare” languages it increased by 1 percentage point to 89%, and for special services it increased by 1 percentage point to 100%.
1 The statistics on the use of language interpreter and translation services in courts and tribunals are Official Statistics, except the statistics under the new contracts which are ‘Provisional Statistics’. The total number of complaints for completed service requests decreased in Q3 2017
Whilst the number of complaints decreased from 447 in Q2 2017 to 420 in Q3 2017, the complaint rate has remained stable, at 1% in Q3 2017.
The total number of ‘off contract’ service requests increased slightly in Q3 2017
The number of service requests ‘off contract’ increased from 302 requests in Q2 2017 to 316 in Q3 2017.
Figure 7: Number of complaints and complaint rate, Q1 2013 to Q3 2017 (Source: Table L2)
Number of complaints and complaint rate (Figure 7)
The most common cause of complaint was ‘interpreter did not attend’ which accounted for 25% (105) of all complaints made in Q3 2017. In the previous quarter the most frequent complaint had been ‘interpreter was late’, but this decreased by 8 percentage points to 23% (95) in Q3 2017. Correspondingly, ‘no interpreter available’ increased by 9 percentage points from Q2 2017, to 19% (81) in the latest quarter.
The complaint rate for each requestor type remained fairly stable between Q2 2017 and Q3 2017. In Q3 2017 the complaint rate was highest in tribunals at 2%, whilst both criminal courts and civil & family courts had complaint rates of less than 1%.
Off contract requests (Table L3)
‘Off contract’ requests at tribunals increased from 174 in Q2 2017 to 184 in Q3 2017, whereas the number of ‘Off contract’ requests made by criminal courts and civil & family courts remained similar to the number requested in Q2 2017.
Tribunals accounted for 58% (184) of all completed 'off contract' service requests, criminal courts accounted for 34% (109), while civil & family courts accounted for 7% (23). Annex C: Further information on criminal courts data
The data presented in this publication are provisional. Final data for each calendar year is published in June each year in our Criminal Courts Statistics annual bulletin, following further data cleaning and the incorporation of additional cases not available in our original extracts of administrative data.
Accompanying files
As well as this bulletin, the following products are published as part of this release:
- Two technical guides providing background information on ‘Criminal Court Statistics’ and ‘Statistics on the use of languages and interpreters in courts and tribunals’, including data collection and processing, as well as relevant revisions policies and legislation.
- A set of overview tables, covering each section of this bulletin.
- A set of pivot tables containing Crown Court data broken down by offence group.
- 3 CSV files which feature court level breakdowns of published data:
- Criminal Courts listings transparency.
- Criminal Courts timeliness.
- Crown Court receipts, disposals and outstanding cases by offence group.
National Statistics status
National Statistics status means that official statistics meet the highest standards of trustworthiness, quality and public value.
All official statistics should comply with all aspects of the Code of Practice for Official Statistics. They are awarded National Statistics status following an assessment by the Authority’s regulatory arm. The Authority considers whether the statistics meet the highest standards of Code compliance, including the value they add to public decisions and debate.
It is the Ministry of Justice’s responsibility to maintain compliance with the standards expected for National Statistics. If we become concerned about whether these statistics are still meeting the appropriate standards, we will discuss any concerns with the Authority promptly. National Statistics status can be removed at any point when the highest standards are not maintained, and reinstated when standards are restored.
Contact
Press enquiries should be directed to the Ministry of Justice press office:
Tel: 020 3334 3536 Email: newsdesk@justice.gsi.gov.uk
Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the Ministry of Justice:
Damon Wingfield, Head of Criminal Justice System Statistics Ministry of Justice, 102 Petty France, London, SW1H 9AJ Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
Next update: 29 March 2018
URL: www.gov.uk/government/statistics/criminal-court-statistics-quarterly-July-to-September-2017
© Crown copyright Produced by the Ministry of Justice
Alternative formats are available on request from statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
______________________________________________________________________
2 Statistics on the use of language interpreter and translation services in courts and tribunals are Official Statistics.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1642-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 9,
"total-input-tokens": 23330,
"total-output-tokens": 4375,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
2144,
1
],
[
2144,
3117,
2
],
[
3117,
4605,
3
],
[
4605,
6303,
4
],
[
6303,
7765,
5
],
[
7765,
9199,
6
],
[
9199,
10732,
7
],
[
10732,
12392,
8
],
[
12392,
15300,
9
]
]
} |
0bd7a8a9d8dde3b87d9a87d6561aa8aae4f851e8 | Criminal court statistics quarterly, England and Wales
April to June 2016
Ministry of Justice Statistics bulletin
Published 29 September 2016
## Contents
| Section | Page | |------------------------------------------------------------------------|------| | Introduction | 2 | | Changes and revisions in this publication | 4 | | Key Findings | 5 | | Criminal Courts | 6 | | 1. Criminal cases in the magistrates' courts | 6 | | 2. Criminal cases in the Crown Court | 7 | | 3. Timeliness | 11 | | Annex A: Enforcement of financial impositions | 14 | | Annex B: End to End Timeliness | 17 | | Annex C: List of Accompanying Tables and CSV | 17 | | Annex D: Explanatory notes | 20 | | Previous editions | 21 | | Contacts | 21 | Introduction
The statistical bulletin
This publication presents statistics relating to activity in criminal cases in magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales. It provides provisional figures for the latest quarter (April to June 2016), with accompanying commentary and analysis. The figures themselves give a summary overview of the volume of cases dealt with by these courts over time. The statistics are used to monitor court workloads, to assist in the development of policy, and their subsequent monitoring and evaluation.
Information on the enforcement of financial impositions can be found in Annex A. The annex provides updated management information on the collection of financial impositions through Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS).
Criminal Courts; an overview
Magistrates’ courts
Virtually all criminal court cases start in the magistrates’ courts. The less serious offences are handled entirely in magistrates’ courts, with over 90% of all cases being dealt with in this way. The more serious offences are passed on to the Crown Court, either for sentencing after the defendant has been found guilty in the magistrates’ court, or for trial with a judge and jury.
As part of wider measures in the justice system, committal hearings were abolished nationally¹ at the end of May 2013. As a result of the change, triable-either-way cases can now be sent straight to the Crown Court as soon as it is clear the matter is serious enough, rather than having to await a committal hearing.
The Crown Court
The Crown Court deals with cases received from the magistrates’ courts for sentencing, trial or appeal against magistrates’ courts’ decision. Of those proceeded against in the magistrates’ courts, around 6% of defendants go on to the Crown Court for trial.
Triable-either-way cases can be sent to the Crown Court for trial if the magistrates’ courts decide the matter is serious enough or if a defendant elects to be tried by judge and jury.
Indictable only cases can only be tried on indictment in the Crown Court as they cannot be heard summarily at the magistrates’ courts.
¹ www.gov.uk/government/news/faster-justice-as-unneccessary-committal-hearings-are-abolished Committed for sentence cases are transferred to the Crown Court for sentencing only after a defendant has been convicted in a magistrates’ court. This would occur where a magistrate believes that their sentencing powers are insufficient to apply an appropriate sanction to the defendant.
In its appellate jurisdiction the Crown Court deals mainly with appeals against conviction and/or sentence in respect of criminal offences, including consequential orders, e.g. disqualification from driving, and against the making of certain standalone orders, e.g. Anti-Social Behaviour Orders. The Crown Court may dismiss or allow the appeal and vary all or any part of the sentence. Appeals are usually heard by a Circuit Judge sitting with no more than four lay magistrates (normally two).
**Average waiting time at the Crown Court**
‘Average waiting time’ is the time between sending a case to the Crown Court and the start of the substantive hearing.
**Average hearing time at the Crown Court**
The ‘average hearing time’ relates to the average duration of all hearings heard in the Crown Court, including preliminary hearings, main hearings, and hearings where a sentence is given to a defendant.
**Data and court processes**
Information about the systems and data included in this publication can be found in the ‘A guide to criminal court statistics’ which is published alongside this report. It also includes a glossary which provides brief definitions for the terms used in this report.
[www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-guide-to-criminal-court-statistics](http://www.gov.uk/government/publications/a-guide-to-criminal-court-statistics) Changes and revisions in this publication
Changes to timeliness methodology to remove 10 year threshold – published as “experimental statistics”
Following a consultation in early 2015, a proposal was agreed to make changes to the end-to-end case timeliness methodology applied within this publication. The proposed change was to remove the 10 year threshold from the validation scripts applied to published estimates. We confirmed our intention in our most recent bulletin released in June 2016 to implement the changes within this release.
Tables based on both the existing and new methodologies have been produced, along with a separate annex document providing users with a detailed explanation of the change in approach and comparisons between statistics produced under the two methodologies. Within this document, however, commentary on the latest trends in the timeliness section is based on the existing methodology.
The statistics produced using the new methodology are badged as "experimental statistics" and do not display the National Statistics logo, as data are still being evaluated and remain subject to further testing in terms of their reliability and ability to meet customer needs.
Subject to user feedback on these experimental statistics, the intention is to produce both methodologies for this release only, after which we will only present statistics and commentary based solely on the new methodology.
Changes to timeliness tables – inclusion of Single Justice Procedure (SJP) cases
In all the timeliness tables produced within this publication, for both existing and new methodologies, Single Justice Procedure cases have been included within the statistics for the first time. These cases were introduced in June 2015 and apply to adult only summary non imprisonable offences which can only be dealt with by magistrates’ courts.
Additional magistrates’ courts timeliness tables – excluding cases committed to the Crown Court
Published timeliness tables at a national level for magistrates’ court cases (tables T2 and T3) include cases committed to the Crown Court. The timeliness transparency file, however, only includes cases fully dealt with in the magistrates’ courts, thereby excluding cases committed to the Crown Court. For completeness, additional national level magistrates’ court tables have been produced (new tables T2b, T3b) to present national timeliness statistics in the same way as the transparency file. These additional tables therefore only include cases fully dealt with at magistrates’ courts and exclude cases committed to the Crown Court; they will become part of the set of timeliness tables produced each quarter. Key Findings
This report presents statistics relating to activity in criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales in the second quarter of 2016 (April to June).
- Disposals in magistrates’ courts remain higher than receipts, resulting in the outstanding magistrates’ court caseload dropping to 291,700 at the end of Q2 2016, the lowest level since Q4 2013.
- Outstanding cases in the Crown Court have been gradually decreasing since Q4 2014. Between Q1 2016 and Q2 2016 they declined by 9% to 43,200 cases, the lowest number of outstanding cases since Q2 2013.
- Over the last 12 months, for cases completing in the Crown Court, the average number of days from first listing to completion in the Crown Court decreased overall from 204 days in Q2 2015 to 185 days in Q2 2016.
- Hearing times for not guilty trials in the Crown Court has increased over the last three quarters to a peak of 15.3 hours in Q2 2016. Hearing times for guilty plea trials have increased to 1.7 hours into Q2 2016. Criminal Courts
At the second quarter of 2016, there were around 240 magistrates’ courts and approximately 80 Crown Court locations across England and Wales.
1. Criminal cases in the magistrates’ courts
Figure 1 below shows the magistrates’ courts caseload for England and Wales.
Figure 1: Magistrates’ courts caseload, Q2 2012 to Q2 2016
Receipts in the magistrates’ courts (figure 1)
The number of receipts fluctuated throughout 2015, but following a decline of 4% between Q4 2015 and Q1 2016 they have remained stable at Q2 2016.
Disposals (figure 1)
Following a peak of 412,400 disposals in Q1 2016, disposals decreased by 3% in Q2 2016 to 400,000, although they continued to be higher than receipts.
Outstanding cases (figure 1)
Outstanding cases dropped to 291,700 cases at the end of Q2 2016, the lowest level since Q4 2013, and a 4% decrease compared to Q1 2016. 2. Criminal cases in the Crown Court
Figure 2 below shows the quarterly Crown Court caseload from Q1 2010 to Q2 2016.
Figure 2: Crown Court caseload, Q1 2010 to Q2 2016
Receipts
Receipts in Q2 2016 were 4% lower than in Q1 2016, and 10% lower than Q2 2015. This latest figure of 28,800 was the lowest of the quarterly time series.
Disposals
Disposals have fallen by 3% between Q1 2016 and Q2 2016 to 32,700, with a decrease of 2% since Q2 2015. Despite this, disposals have continued to be higher than receipts for the last 6 quarters, driving the falling trend in the number of outstanding cases.
Outstanding cases
Outstanding cases in the Crown Court have been gradually decreasing since Q4 2014. Between Q1 2016 and Q2 2016 they declined by 9% to 43,200 cases, the lowest number of outstanding cases since Q2 2013. Receipts by case type (figure 3)
Triable-either-way trial case receipts fell by 9% from Q1 2016. They have driven the overall downward trend in all receipts over the last twelve months, with a decrease of 20% between Q2 2015 and Q2 2016. Indictable only trial case receipts have remained fairly constant from Q1 2016 into Q2 2016, but have fallen by 5% since Q2 2015.
Both committal for sentence and appeals receipts remained stable between Q1 2016 and Q2 2016. Over a longer period, however, the number of committal for sentence receipts has increased by 5% since Q2 2015, while appeals have decreased by 13% over the same time period.
Figure 3: Crown Court receipts by case type, Q1 2010 to Q1 2016
Disposals by case type (figure 4)
Overall, triable-either-way disposals have been higher than receipts since Q1 2015, although they decreased by 9% between Q1 2016 and Q2 2016. The number of indictable only disposals has continued to remain stable, at around 8,000 at Q2 2016.
Committed for sentence disposals have increased by 10% since Q2 2015, whilst appeals have fluctuated since Q2 2015, with a small increase of 4% from Q1 2016. Outstanding cases by case type (figure 5)
The trend in triable-either-way outstanding cases drives the trend in the overall number of outstanding cases, with a decrease of 11% in the latest quarter and 24% between Q2 2015 and Q2 2016. This follows the declining trend seen since Q1 2015, which has been driven by disposals for triable-either-way cases being greater than corresponding receipts over this time period.
Indictable only cases have followed a similar pattern but to a lesser magnitude, decreasing by 6% in the latest quarter and by 14% between Q2 2015 and Q2 2016. Committed for sentence outstanding cases had remained fairly steady since Q2 2014 but have since dropped by 5% in the latest quarter. Appeals have also declined in Q2 2016, by 8% compared to Q1 2016. Receipts, disposals and outstanding cases by offence group (figure 6)
In Q2 2016, violence against the person had the highest volume of receipts, followed by miscellaneous crimes against society, sexual offences and drug offences.
For disposals, violence against the person had the highest number in Q2 2016 followed by miscellaneous crimes against society, drug offences and theft offences.
Outstanding cases followed a similar pattern, with violence against the person having the highest amount of cases, followed by sexual offences and miscellaneous crimes against society. Although the number of disposals for sexual offences is higher than receipts in Q2 2016, the high number of outstanding cases may be due to the length of time these cases take to complete in comparison to other offence groups.
At Q2 2016, disposals were higher than receipts for each offence group, resulting in outstanding cases decreasing across each of the groups between Q1 and Q2 2016. 3. Timeliness
Methodology notes
The statistics below are based on the existing end-to-end timeliness methodology in line with previous publications, which excludes cases where the total duration from offence to completion is greater than 10 years. See the Changes and revisions in this publication section of this bulletin for more details on changes to timeliness methodology.
Offence to completion in the magistrates’ courts
For cases in the magistrates’ courts, the (mean) average number of days from offence to completion increased from 155 days in Q2 2015 to 164 days in Q1 2016, but decreased to 162 days in Q2 2016. Crown Court criminal cases - First listing in the magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court (figure 7)
Over the last 12 months, for cases completing in the Crown Court, the average number of days from first listing to completion in the Crown Court decreased overall from 204 days in Q2 2015 to 185 days in Q2 2016. In the latest quarter, there was a small increase from 183 days in Q1 2016.
The average time from first listing at the magistrates’ court to receipt by the Crown Court has remained at a similar level of 5 days since late 2014.
The average time from receipt by the Crown Court to completion decreased from 199 days in Q2 2015 to 180 days in Q2 2016, driving the overall decrease in the number of days from first listing to completion over the last 12 months. In the latest quarter, however, the average time from receipt by the Crown Court to completion increased by 3 days from 177 days in Q1 2016.
Figure 7: Average number of days (mean) from first listing in the magistrates’ courts to completion in the Crown Court, for Crown Court criminal cases, Q2 2010 to Q2 2016
Average waiting times at the Crown Court (figure 8)
Waiting times for triable-either-way cases have increased since the last quarter from 20.2 weeks in Q1 2016 to 20.5 weeks in Q2 2016, whilst indictable only cases have increased from 21.3 weeks to 21.8 weeks. For non-trial cases, there was a small decrease of 0.4 weeks for committed for sentence cases and also for appeals. Figure 8: Average waiting time (weeks) at the Crown Court, Q1 2010 to Q2 2016
Average hearing times at the Crown Court (figure 9)
- Hearing times for not guilty trials in the Crown Court has increased over the last three quarters to a peak of 15.3 hours in Q2 2016. Hearing times for guilty plea trials have increased to 1.7 hours into Q2 2016.
Figure 9: Average hearing time (hours) at the Crown Court, Q1 2010 to Q2 2016 Annex A: Enforcement of financial impositions
The following section provides updated management information on the collection of financial impositions through Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunals Service (HMCTS). Impositions made in this time period are reported, and payment information will continue to be recorded.
Financial impositions are ordered by the criminal courts for payment by offenders at sentencing and include financial penalties such as fines, prosecutors’ costs, compensation orders and victim surcharge. Financial penalties are the most commonly used sentence and form a significant part of HMCTS’ collection and enforcement business. Accounting centres also enforce penalty notices for disorder and fixed penalty notices registered as fines for enforcement. The financial imposition statistics presented here do not include confiscation orders. Figure 10 shows the financial impositions for each quarter split by imposition type.
Figure 10: HMCTS management information: Financial impositions by imposition type, England and Wales, Q2 2011 - Q2 2016
Note: The Criminal Court Charge (CCC) ceased to exist on 24 December 2015 but impositions still appear due to when the data are entered onto the system. Financial impositions and amounts paid (Table A1)
Financial penalties can be imposed by the magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court; although they are all collected and enforced by the HMCTS National Compliance and Enforcement Service.
The total value of financial penalties paid in Q2 2016, regardless of the age of the imposition, was £118 million, the highest figure since Q1 2009, when the time series began. This was a 37% increase when compared with the same quarter in 2015 and an 8% increase since Q1 2016.
Financial impositions and amounts paid by imposition type (Table A2, figure 10)
Total financial impositions have increased by 30% between Q2 2015 and Q2 2016, driven by an increase to fines in earlier quarters and an increase in compensation impositions, of £11 million, in the latest quarter. This is predominantly due to a single high value figure imposed to one account. There have also been a number of other high value impositions for cases included within compensation, such as Health and Safety Executive cases.
In Q2 2016, 21% (£33.6 million) of all financial impositions imposed by the criminal courts were paid within the imposition month. This proportion is the highest since Q2 2011, when this time series began, and is driven by an increase in compensation payments within the imposition month.
Financial impositions (£ million) for victim surcharge (Table A2, figure 11)
Victim surcharge is an additional surcharge which is added to the fines that are imposed. The receipts obtained from the collection of these monies by HMCTS are passed to the Justice Policy Group of the MoJ to fund victims’ services. The amount imposed has been increasing since its scope and amounts payable were extended in October 2012.
Following a period of stability between Q1 2015 and Q4 2015, impositions have increased at the start of 2016 and are 13% higher at Q2 2016 than at Q4 2015. While the amount imposed has increased, the proportion of impositions collected within the imposition month has decreased from 11% in Q2 2015 to 10% in Q2 2016. Financial imposition accounts opened and closed (Table A3)
An account is opened when a financial penalty is ordered in court and is closed when the imposition against the account has been paid or the imposition ceases. Where a defendant has more than one financial penalty and/or account, these can be consolidated into one account.
There were 324,000 accounts opened in Q2 2016, remaining stable since Q1 2016, but decreasing by 2% when compared to the same period in the previous year. Of the accounts opened in Q1 2016, 9% (30,100) were closed within the imposition month.
Outstanding financial impositions (Table A4)
The amount outstanding is irrespective of the age of the imposition or the payment terms, and excludes all impositions already paid as well as both legal and administrative cancellations. Payment terms may include arrangements for offenders to pay amounts owed over a period of time.
In Q2 2016, the total value of financial impositions outstanding in England and Wales was £706 million. The amount of outstanding financial impositions has been increasing since Q1 2014, and show an increase of 29% between Q1 2014 and Q1 2016. The increase since Q2 2015 is partially due to owed criminal court charge payments. Annex B: End to End Timeliness new methodology
Published as a separate document alongside this bulletin.
Annex C: List of Accompanying Tables and CSV
Accompanying this publication are the following tables:
Table M1 Receipts, disposals and outstanding criminal cases in the magistrates' courts in England and Wales, annually 2012 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2012 – Q2 2016
Table M2 Effectiveness of magistrates' courts' trials in England and Wales, annually 2003 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016
Table M3 Key reasons for ineffective magistrates' courts' trials in England and Wales, annually 2006 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016
Table M4 Key reasons for cracked magistrates' courts' trials in England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016
Table C1 Receipts, disposals and outstanding cases in the Crown Court in England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016
Table C1a Receipts by offence group in the Crown Court in England and Wales, annual 2014 – 2015, quarterly Q1 2014 – Q2 2016
Table C1b Disposals by offence group in the Crown Court in England and Wales, annual 2014 – 2015, quarterly Q1 2014 – Q2 2016
Table C1c Outstanding cases by offence group in the Crown Court in England and Wales, annual 2014 – 2015, quarterly Q1 2014 – Q2 2016
Table C2 Effectiveness of Crown Court trials in England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016
Table C3 Key reasons for ineffective Crown Court trials in England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016
Table C4 Key reasons for cracked Crown Court trials in England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016
Table C5 Defendants dealt with in trial cases in the Crown Court by plea in England and Wales, annually 2001 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016
Table C6 Defendants dealt with in trial cases by stage at which guilty plea was entered and accepted in the Crown Court, by receipt type, England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016 | Table | Description | |-------|-------------| | C7 | Defendants dealt with in trial cases where a guilty plea was entered before a trial, during trial or at a cracked trial, and accepted in the Crown Court, by receipt type, England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016 | | C8 | Average waiting times in the Crown Court in England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016 | | C9 | Average waiting times (weeks) in the Crown Court for defendants dealt with in trial cases, by plea and remand type, England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016 | | C10 | Average hearing and waiting times for trial cases in the Crown Court by plea in England and Wales, annually 2000 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016 | | C11 | Average hearing times (hours) in the Crown Court for cases disposed of, by case type and plea, England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016 | | C12 | Appeals (against decisions of magistrates' courts) dealt with in the Crown Court, by appeal type and result, England and Wales, annually 2007 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016 | | T1 | Average number of days from offence to completion, percentage of proceedings completed at first listing and average number of hearings for criminal cases at the magistrates' courts by initial plea, England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q2 2016 | | T2 | Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all criminal cases at the magistrates' courts in England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q2 2016 | | T3 | Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all summary cases at the magistrates' courts in England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q2 2016 | | T4 | Average number of days taken from offence to completion for Crown Court criminal cases in England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q2 2016 | | T5 | Average number of days taken from offence to completion for criminal cases in England and Wales, annually 2010 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q2 2016 | | T6a | Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all criminal cases by offence group, in England and Wales, Q1 2015 and Q2 2016 | | T6b | Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all criminal cases by offence group, in England and Wales, annually 2011 - 2015 | | A1 | Enforcement of financial penalties in the magistrates' courts, England and Wales, annually 2004 - 2015, quarterly Q1 2010 – Q2 2016 | | A2 | HMCTS management information: Financial impositions and amounts paid by imposition type, England and Wales, annual 2011 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2011 – Q2 2016 | Table A3 HMCTS management information: Number of financial imposition accounts opened and closed, annually 2011 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2011 – Q2 2016
Table A4 HMCTS management information: Total amount of financial impositions outstanding, annually 2011 - 2015, quarterly Q2 2011 – Q2 2016
Annex T2a Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all criminal cases at the magistrates’ courts including those committed to the Crown Court, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q2 2016
Annex T2b Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all criminal cases at the magistrates’ courts excluding those committed to the Crown Court, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q2 2016
Annex T3a Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all summary cases at the magistrates’ courts including those committed to the Crown Court, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q2 2016
Annex T3b Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all summary cases at the magistrates’ courts excluding those committed to the Crown Court, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q2 2016
Annex T4 Average number of days taken from offence to completion for Crown Court criminal cases in England and Wales, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q2 2016
Annex T5 Average number of days taken from offence to completion for criminal cases, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q2 2016
Annex T6a Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all criminal cases by offence group, quarterly Q2 2010 – Q2 2016
Annex T6b Average number of days taken from offence to completion for all criminal cases by offence group, annually 2011 - 2015
There are also a number of csv files that support this publication, these include:
- National and court level workload activity and case progression data
- National and court level timeliness data Annex D: Explanatory notes
The United Kingdom Statistics Authority has designated these statistics as National Statistics, in accordance with the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007 and signifying compliance with the Code of Practice for Official Statistics. Designation can be broadly interpreted to mean that the statistics:
- meet identified user needs;
- are well explained and readily accessible;
- are produced according to sound methods, and
- are managed impartially and objectively in the public interest.
Once statistics have been designated as National Statistics, it is a statutory requirement that the Code of Practice shall continue to be observed.
The statistics in this bulletin relate to cases in the magistrates’ courts and the Crown Court in England and Wales. Calendar year statistics are also provided.
Breakdowns of many of the summary figures presented in this bulletin, such as split by court or by HMCTS area, are available in the Comma Separated Value (CSV) files that accompany this publication.
Revisions
The statistics in the latest quarter are provisional, and are therefore liable to revision to take account of any late amendments to the administrative databases from which these statistics are sourced. The standard process for revising the published statistics to account for these late amendments is as follows:
- An initial revision to the statistics for the latest quarter may be made when the next edition of this bulletin is published. Further revisions may be made when the figures are reconciled at the end of the year. If revisions are needed in the subsequent year this will be clearly annotated in the tables.
For more information please see the Guide to criminal court statistics.
Symbols and conventions
The following symbols have been used throughout the tables in this bulletin:
.. = Not applicable
- = Not available 0 = Nil (r) = Revised data (p) = Provisional data Previous editions
Previous editions of Court Statistics Quarterly can be found at: www.gov.uk/government/collections/court-statistics-quarterly#court-statistics-quarterly-reports
Future publication
The next publication of Criminal court statistics quarterly is scheduled to be published on 15 December 2016, covering the period July to September 2016.
Contacts
Press enquiries on the contents of this bulletin should be directed to the Ministry of Justice or Her Majesty’s Courts and Tribunal Service (HMCTS) press offices:
Ministry of Justice News Desk Tel: 020 3334 3536 Email: newsdesk@justice.gsi.gov.uk
Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the Ministry of Justice:
David Jagger Ministry of Justice 102 Petty France London SW1H 9AJ Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
General enquiries about the statistics work of the Ministry of Justice can be emailed to statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
General information about the official statistics system of the UK is available from www.statistics.gov.uk
Feedback
The structure and content of this report is continually being reviewed to reflect user requirements. If you have any feedback about these changes, or the report more generally, please contact the production team through the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the Ministry of Justice:
Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
© Crown copyright Produced by the Ministry of Justice
Alternative formats are available on request from statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1643-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 22,
"total-input-tokens": 51476,
"total-output-tokens": 8572,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
145,
1
],
[
145,
1389,
2
],
[
1389,
3618,
3
],
[
3618,
5266,
4
],
[
5266,
7941,
5
],
[
7941,
8974,
6
],
[
8974,
9855,
7
],
[
9855,
10681,
8
],
[
10681,
11823,
9
],
[
11823,
12602,
10
],
[
12602,
13574,
11
],
[
13574,
14201,
12
],
[
14201,
15680,
13
],
[
15680,
16106,
14
],
[
16106,
17331,
15
],
[
17331,
19396,
16
],
[
19396,
20634,
17
],
[
20634,
22669,
18
],
[
22669,
25421,
19
],
[
25421,
27207,
20
],
[
27207,
29143,
21
],
[
29143,
30755,
22
]
]
} |
6ab4de9bd6a4cf3f44c1b02d40e9f0569958c71e | CCTV and Parking Enforcement
Government has proposed abolishing the use of CCTV to enforce traffic and parking regulations. London Councils believes that, not only will this impact on borough efforts to keep London moving, but may also have damaging consequences for local CCTV provision, leading to unintended impacts on wider crime reduction and community safety activity. This briefing sets out the background to this issue and highlights efforts to persuade the government to think again.
Overview
The government has signalled its intent to restrict the use of Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) to enforce parking and traffic regulations. Launching a consultation on the issue in December 2013 the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government said:
“We want to rein in these over-zealous and unfair rules on parking enforcement, so it focuses on supporting high streets and motorists, not raising money. Parking spy cameras are just one example of this and a step too far. Public confidence is strengthened in CCTV if it is used to tackle crime, not to raise money for council officers.”
London Councils’ Transport and Environment Committee has responded to this consultation rejecting the government’s characterisation of local authority parking enforcement activity and making the case for the use of CCTV in keeping traffic moving and streets clear.
If the government gets its way then there are also likely to be unintended consequences that directly impact on community safety and crime reduction. CCTV is a non-statutory service. London boroughs face a reduction in funding of nearly 40 per cent over the period of this Parliament.
Many councils are having to make hard choices to protect vital statutory services and the government’s proposals may leave them with no option but to either partially or fully withdraw CCTV provision. This would have a significant impact on the evidence collection and enforcement activities of the police and wider community safety initiatives.
London Councils has pressed the government to reconsider its position and raised the issue with the Mayor’s Office for Police and Crime (MOPAC). This briefing sets out the background to this concern and reflects on the wider fact that local authority finances are now so tight that top down intervention runs the very real risk of destabilising local finances and undermining hard-fought, locally-agreed service priorities. Analysis
There are approximately 10,000 CCTV cameras operated by London boroughs across the capital. Provision ranges significantly between councils, with Haringey operating 52 cameras and Wandsworth operating over 1,200.
These devices support a variety of activities including parking and traffic enforcement, community safety, estate management and crime reduction. In particular, there is strong evidence to suggest CCTV plays a vital role in supporting the work of the police. For example, in Hackney, as a result of joint CCTV and police operations during December 2013, 170 arrests were made and £15,500 worth of stolen vehicles recovered.
Over the past four years net revenue expenditure on CCTV has averaged approximately £530,000 per borough. In 2012/13, the most recent year for which figures are available, net revenue expenditure ranged from £1.4 million in Hounslow to £130,000 in Richmond. On average, employee costs account for approximately 34 per cent of gross expenditure on local CCTV services.
Funding for London borough CCTV services comes from a variety of sources including: local authority finances raised through council tax and business rate retention; re-charges to local authority housing revenue accounts; and, income generated through penalty charge notices (PCNs).
Local authority CCTV is a non-statutory service. Many boroughs have expressed serious concern about their ability to fully fund statutory services, particularly those relating to adult social care and vulnerable young people. As such, borough CCTV provision risks becoming financially unviable and being either fully or partially withdrawn. This would result in a significant loss of evidence-reporting infrastructure for the police, impacting on arrest levels and wider community safety initiatives.
There may be opportunities to minimise the loss of service through reconfiguration and greater cross-agency integration. However, funding is likely to remain scarce. Rules relating to local housing revenue accounts mean that the scope for recharge is limited to those cameras providing coverage of local authority housing estates. And the government has already indicated it is likely to scrutinise carefully the use of public health integration funds.
A further source of service cross-subsidy is provided by income generated through penalty charge notices for parking and traffic violations. While local authorities are prohibited from using PCNs as a means of raising revenue they do help support the CCTV infrastructure required for effective enforcement. Such support reduces the marginal cost of offering wider CCTV provision within a borough and plays a part in sustaining its operation.
In December 2013, the Departments for Transport and Communities and Local Government announced a joint consultation on local authority parking enforcement. As part of a wide-ranging set of questions this proposed abolishing the use of CCTV cameras for parking and traffic enforcement.
London Councils’ Transport and Environment Committee (TEC) has responded to this consultation arguing that CCTV plays a vital role in enforcing traffic and parking regulations, noting the wider role devices used for the purposes of traffic enforcement play in maintaining community safety and advising caution in taking forward changes that could potentially destabilise the funding mix used to support this service.
However, London Councils remain concerned that the wider implications of the government’s proposals and their potential unintended service impacts have yet to be fully recognised.
Commentary
For many who work closely with London boroughs, the government’s assertion that CCTV is being used to unfairly penalise motorists simply won’t ring true. In a city like London, councils have a responsibility to keep the streets clear and the traffic moving. Motorists may not like being penalised, but city-wide gridlock is unlikely to be a more popular prospect. Similarly, the assertion that local authorities are reluctant to support local businesses or maintain vibrant high-streets would strike most as a depiction out of step with the realities facing local communities and an unfair caricature of local decisions and priorities.
London Councils’ Transport and Environment Committee has outlined a number of practical reasons for using CCTV rather than relying on street enforcement by traffic wardens. It is simply neither practical nor possible to achieve comparable levels of enforcement through increased staff levels and regulations are only worthwhile if they can be enforced.
More than this however, the government’s intervention suggests a failure to carry out sufficiently joined-up thinking. CCTV, like many local public services is funded through a variety of means. Revenue generated through Penalty Charge Notices for parking and traffic violations has played a role in cross-subsidising camera infrastructure and running costs. Prohibiting the use of CCTV in enforcing parking and traffic regulations will not only shift the burden towards the increased use of wardens, but also choke off an important part of the funding mix.
London Councils is talking to the Mayor’s Office for Police and Crime, with a view to aligning approaches to persuading the government to think again and take more account of the potential impact its proposals relating to parking are likely to have on CCTV’s role in tackling crime. We hope for a positive outcome, but the challenge this issue presents may simply be the tip of the iceberg.
Local authorities continue to bear the brunt of the government’s reductions in public spending. The next 18 months promise hard decisions and the withdrawal of many popular local services. While some have raised the possibility that these changes call into question the viability of local government, the expectation in London is that boroughs will continue to work with the widespread support of their communities to make savings and deliver vital public services.
To do this requires confidence in funding levels, freedom to make robust decisions. In many cases, borough books are finely balanced and while top-down intervention can never be ruled out, there is increasingly little scope for accommodating cost-shunts and revenue squeezes from the centre.
London local government plays a vital role in offering a platform for economic growth and an environment for communities to thrive. Reductions in funding have eroded their ability to do both.
CCTV provision is important to communities and represents a high-profile non-statutory service which delivers significant wider benefits to public partners, most notably the police. Its operation entails a tight-knit of resources and roles and exemplifies the position of local authorities as providing services that help weave communities together. The government should be careful that in seeking to pull the plug on CCTV’s role in traffic and parking enforcement it doesn’t unintentionally unravel a great deal more.
Author: Philip Clifford, Policy and Project Manager (T: 020 7934 9792) Click here to send a comment or query to the author
Links: Local authority parking strategies - consultation London Councils’ response to consultation (Leaders’ Committee)
This member briefing has been circulated to: Portfolio holders and those members who requested policy briefings in the following categories: Transport, Crime and Public Protection
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1644-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 3,
"total-input-tokens": 6444,
"total-output-tokens": 1965,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
2430,
1
],
[
2430,
6213,
2
],
[
6213,
9867,
3
]
]
} |
135eb3787220de846529a6ec376367e55bba9152 | CCTV Code of Practice for Cheltenham Town Hall Garden Bar v2 April 2014
This code of practice has been compiled using the principles and definitions laid out in the main Cheltenham Borough Council Policy.
This Code along with Policy above gives detail and provides guidance on the appropriate and effective use of surveillance camera systems and in particular how it meets the requirements of:
- the Data Protection Act 1998. (1998 Act)
- the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. (2000 Act)
- the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. (2012 Act)
- Information Commissioners CCTV Code of Practice
- Surveillance Commissioners, Surveillance Camera Code of Practice
- Information Security Policy
- Data Protection Policy
- Guidance and processes in relation to The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA)
1.1. Management of the scheme
1.1 A privacy impact assessment has been carried out to assess the need and requirements of CCTV systems within Cheltenham Town Hall garden bar and its associated facilities. Cameras have been sited to capture images which are relevant to the protection of the business and customers of the Garden Bar. This assessment is reviewed on an annual basis by the Entertainment & Business Manager/Operations Manager.
1.2 There are 8 cameras covering the licensed area including the bar, Skillicorne Gardens and the walkway between the Town hall and the Quadrangle (leading to the public toilets). They are sited to capture images which are relevant to the operation of the business. Details of these and their locations are in appendix A
1.3 The scheme will be operated using overt cameras which are sited so as not to intrude unreasonably on members of the public or staff. The CCTV scheme seeks to comply with both the Data Protection Act 1988 and the Commissioners code of practice.
1.4 The Garden Bar owners and users of the system will treat any viewed and/or recorded material as being confidential.
1.5 Staff who have authorised access are aware of the purpose(s) for which the scheme has been established and that the CCTV equipment is only used to achieve the identified purposes which are the detection and prevention of crime and the prosecution of offenders.
2.0 Scheme and Signage
2.1 This scheme aims to provide surveillance of the public areas in and around The Garden Bar in order to fulfil the purposes of the scheme as listed above. The area protected by CCTV will be indicated by the presence of signs. The signs will be placed so that the public are aware that they are entering a zone which is covered by surveillance equipment. The signs will state the organization responsible for the scheme (Cheltenham Town Hall), the purposes of the scheme (Crime prevention and public safety) and a contact telephone number (01242 521621)
2.2 Data will not be held for longer than necessary and disposal of information will be regulated by the Operations Manager. The disposal of records happens as part of a managed process and is adequately documented within the service document retention schedule.
2.3 Point of contact 2.4 The Code of Practice for The Garden Bar informs the public on how to make contact with the owners of the scheme. For additional information write to: Operations Manager, Cheltenham Town Hall, Imperial Square, Cheltenham GL50 1QA
3.0 Release of information to the public
3.1 Information will be released to third parties; The Police or any other authorised organisation, which can show legitimate reasons for access. They will be required to request any information with reasons in writing and identify themselves.
3.2 Information will be released if the reasons are deemed acceptable, the request and release of information complies with current legislation and on condition that the information is not used for any other purpose than that specified.
3.3 Individuals may request to view information concerning them held on record in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.
3.4 Applications must be in the form of a CCTV Subject Access Request - available on the Cheltenham Borough Council transparency website
4.0 Release of information to statutory prosecuting bodies
4.1 Requests for information will be dealt with according to Section 29 & 35 of The Data Protection Act 1998
4.2 Applications must be in the form of a CCTV Subject Access Request - available on the main Cheltenham Borough Council website
5.0 System Registration
5.1 All Council systems must be registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) and it is the responsibility of service managers to ensure that these are kept up to date. Any amendments to the scheme that result in the need to update the ICO register must be forwarded to the Customer Relations Team.
6.0 Accountability
6.1 Cheltenham Town Hall and Cheltenham Borough Council support the principle that the community at large should be satisfied that the Public CCTV systems are being used, managed and controlled in a responsible and accountable manner and that in order to meet this objective there will be independent assessment and scrutiny.
6.2 A member of the public wishing to make a complaint about the system may do so through the Cheltenham Borough Council complaints procedure or contacting Cheltenham Town Hall directly by writing to the Entertainment & Business Manager.
6.3 A copy of the Code of Practice will be made available to anyone on request by contacting either the (Entertainment & Business Manager or Operations Manager at Cheltenham Town Hall)
7.0 CCTV Control Management and Operation
7.1 The system is located in a locked office.
7.2 Only those persons with a legitimate purpose will be permitted to access the recording and monitoring system.
7.3 Access to the system may be required by • Authorised Personnel (including Council Representatives) • Police officers to view a particular incident for intelligence or evidential purposes. These visits will take place by prior appointment. • Engineers of our nominated contractor for maintenance purposes
7.4 Inspectors/Auditors may visit the monitoring and recording facility without prior appointment. 7.5 All visits by authorised persons requiring access to the system will be logged.
8.0 Observation and recording of incidents 8.1 Recording will be 24 hours per day, 7 days a week. The system will be monitored on the basis of operational need. Images will be held for 14 days and then over recorded.
9.0 Privacy And Disclosure Issues 9.1 Cameras will not be used to infringe individual’s rights of privacy. The cameras are sited where they will not be capable of viewing any private areas. 9.2 All employees will be aware of the restrictions set out in this Code of Practice in relation to access to and disclosure of recorded images 9.3 Images not required for the purposes of the scheme will not be retained longer than necessary 9.4 The Operations Manager will only disclose to third parties who intend processing the data for purposes which are deemed compatible with the objectives of the CCTV system 9.5 Monitors displaying images from areas in which individuals would have an expectation of privacy will not be viewed by anyone other than authorised persons. 9.6 Recorded material will only be used for the purposes defined in this policy. 9.7 Access to recorded material will be in accordance with policy and procedures. 9.8 Information will not be disclosed for commercial or entertainment purposes. 9.9 Access to recorded images will be restricted to staff that require access in order to achieve the purpose(s) defined in this policy. 9.10 Viewing of the recorded images will take place in a restricted area.
10.0 Access to recorded images 10.1 Access to recorded images will be restricted to the Entertainment & Business/Operations Manager or designated member of staff who will decide whether to allow requests for access by third parties in accordance with the disclosure policy. Those requests must be in writing.
11.0 Monitoring employees 11.1 The system will record images of employees during the course of the general surveillance. The main purpose of the CCTV is to prevent and detect crime and it is not designed to be used for monitoring the amount of work done or compliance with company procedures. However if there is a breach in Council/Site procedures then recorded images may be used for reference/evidence purposes.
12.0 Access to data by third parties 12.1 Access to images by third parties will only be allowed in limited and prescribed circumstances.
12.2 Requests for information will be dealt with according to Section 29 & 35 of The Data Protection Act 1998
12.3 Applications must be in the form of a Subject Access Request – see Appendix C
13.0 Recorded Material Management
13.1 Images not required for the purpose(s) for which the equipment is being used will not be retained for no longer than is necessary. The detail as to how long data should be held will be defined within the service retention schedule. While images are retained access to and security of the images will be controlled in accordance with the requirements of the Data Protection Act.
13.2 Recorded material should be of high quality. In order for recorded material to be admissible in evidence the integrity and continuity must be maintained at all times.
13.3 Security measures will be taken to prevent unauthorised access to, alteration, disclosure, accidental loss or destruction of recorded material.
13.4 Recorded material will not be released to organisations outside the ownership of the system other than for training purposes or under the guidelines referred to previously.
13.5 Images retained for evidential purposes will be retained in a secure place where access is controlled – safe or locked cupboard in the management office.
13.6 The system records features such as the location of the camera and/or date and time reference.
13.7 In order to ensure that clear images are recorded at all times the equipment for making recordings will be maintained in good working order with regular servicing in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.
14.0 Documentation
14.1 Log books must be sequential in order that pages or entries cannot be removed and full and accurate records kept.
14.2 The following administrative documents shall be maintained:
- occurrence/incident book
- visitors register
- maintenance of equipment, whether routine or breakdown
- list of installed equipment Appendix A – Camera detail and locations
Camera 1: Rear of bar, centre pointing right – Samsung Internal dome IR Camera 2: Rear of bar, centre pointing left - Samsung Internal dome IR Camera 3: Rear of bar, left pointing centre - Samsung Internal dome IR Camera 4: Rear of bar, left pointing left – Samsung Internal dome IR Camera 5: Skillicorne Gardens right, high – Samsung vandal resistant dome IR Camera 6: Skillicorne Gardens right – Samsung vandal resistant dome IR Camera 7: Skillicorne Gardens right – Samsung vandal resistant dome IR Camera 8: Front of Garden Bar right to left – Samsung vandal resistant dome IR Camera 9: CBC owned walkway between Town Hall and Quadrangle pointing towards public toilets - Samsung vandal resistant dome IR
The cameras detailed above monitor the main licensed areas, exits and bar producing images of sufficient quality to support any evidence for a prosecution or legal action.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1645-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 5,
"total-input-tokens": 11129,
"total-output-tokens": 2594,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3080,
1
],
[
3080,
5766,
2
],
[
5766,
8417,
3
],
[
8417,
10457,
4
],
[
10457,
11380,
5
]
]
} |
90e4edf931f2b9055c16039fbd1bbf579674f834 | CCTV Code of Practice for Cheltenham Town Hall Main Building v2 April 2014
This code of practice has been compiled using the principles and definitions laid out in the main Cheltenham Borough Council Policy.
This Code along with Policy above gives detail and provides guidance on the appropriate and effective use of surveillance camera systems and in particular how it meets the requirements of:
- the Data Protection Act 1998. (1998 Act)
- the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. (2000 Act)
- the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. (2012 Act)
- Information Commissioners CCTV Code of Practice
- Surveillance Commissioners, Surveillance Camera Code of Practice.
- Information Security Policy
- Data Protection Policy
- Guidance and processes in relation to The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA)
1.1. Management of the scheme
1.1 A privacy impact assessment has been carried out to assess the need and requirements of CCTV systems within Cheltenham Town Hall and its associated facilities. Cameras have been sited to capture images which are relevant to the protection of the business and customers of Cheltenham Town Hall. This assessment is reviewed on an annual basis by the Entertainment & Business Manager/Operations Manager.
1.2 There are 8 cameras covering all major entrance/exits and other key areas such as external walkways, reception and bar. They are sited to capture images which are relevant to the operation of the business. Details of these and their locations are in appendix A.
1.3 The scheme will be operated using overt cameras which are sited so as not to intrude unreasonably on members of the public or staff. The CCTV scheme seeks to comply with both the Data Protection Act 1988 and the Commissioners code of practice.
1.4 Cheltenham Town Hall owners and users of the system will treat any viewed and/or recorded material as being confidential.
1.5 Staff who have authorised access are aware of the purpose(s) for which the scheme has been established and that the CCTV equipment is only used to achieve the identified purposes which are the detection and prevention of crime and the prosecution of offenders.
2.0 Scheme and Signage
2.1 This scheme aims to provide surveillance of the public areas in and around Cheltenham Town Hall in order to fulfil the purposes of the scheme as listed above. The area protected by CCTV will be indicated by the presence of signs. The signs will be placed so that the public are aware that they are entering a zone which is covered by surveillance equipment. The signs will state the organization responsible for the scheme (Cheltenham Town Hall), the purposes of the scheme (Crime prevention and public safety) and a contact telephone number (01242 521621).
2.2 Data will not be held for longer than necessary and disposal of information will be regulated by the Operations Manager. The disposal of records happens as part of a managed process and is adequately documented within the service document retention schedule.
2.3 Point of contact
2.4 The Code of Practice for Cheltenham Town Hall informs the public on how to make contact with the owners of the scheme. For additional information write to: Operations Manager, Cheltenham Town Hall, Imperial Square, Cheltenham GL50 1QA. 3.0 Release of information to the public
3.1 Information will be released to third parties; The Police or any other authorised organisation, which can show legitimate reasons for access. They will be required to request any information with reasons in writing and identify themselves.
3.2 Information will be released if the reasons are deemed acceptable, the request and release of information complies with current legislation and on condition that the information is not used for any other purpose than that specified.
3.3 Individuals may request to view information concerning them held on record in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.
3.4 Applications must be in the form of a CCTV Subject Access Request - available on the Cheltenham Borough Council transparency website
4.0 Release of information to statutory prosecuting bodies
4.1 Requests for information will be dealt with according to Section 29 & 35 of The Data Protection Act 1998
4.2 Applications must be in the form of a CCTV Subject Access Request - available on the Cheltenham Borough Council transparency website
5.0 System Registration
5.1 All Council systems must be registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) and it is the responsibility of service managers to ensure that these are kept up to date. Any amendments to the scheme that result in the need to update the ICO register must be forwarded to the Customer Relations Team.
6.0 Accountability
6.1 Cheltenham Town Hall and Cheltenham Borough Council support the principle that the community at large should be satisfied that the Public CCTV systems are being used, managed and controlled in a responsible and accountable manner and that in order to meet this objective there will be independent assessment and scrutiny.
6.2 A member of the public wishing to make a complaint about the system may do so through the Cheltenham Borough Council complaints procedure or contacting Cheltenham Town Hall directly by writing to the Entertainment & Business Manager.
6.3 A copy of the Code of Practice will be made available to anyone on request by contacting either the (Entertainment & Business Manager or Operations Manager at Cheltenham Town Hall)
7.0 CCTV Control Management and Operation
7.1 The system is located in a locked office.
7.2 Only those persons with a legitimate purpose will be permitted to access the recording and monitoring system.
7.3 Access to the system may be required by
- Authorised Personnel (including Council Representatives)
- Police officers to view a particular incident for intelligence or evidential purposes. These visits will take place by prior appointment.
- Engineers of our nominated contractor for maintenance purposes
7.4 Inspectors/Auditors may visit the monitoring and recording facility without prior appointment. 7.5 All visits by authorised persons requiring access to the system will be logged.
8.0 Observation and recording of incidents
8.1 Recording will be 24 hours per day, 7 days a week. The system will be monitored on the basis of operational need. Images will be held for 14 days and then over recorded.
9.0 Privacy And Disclosure Issues
9.1 Cameras will not be used to infringe individual’s rights of privacy. The cameras are sited where they will not be capable of viewing any private areas. 9.2 All employees will be aware of the restrictions set out in this Code of Practice in relation to access to and disclosure of recorded images 9.3 Images not required for the purposes of the scheme will not be retained longer than necessary 9.4 The Operations Manager will only disclose to third parties who intend processing the data for purposes which are deemed compatible with the objectives of the CCTV system 9.5 Monitors displaying images from areas in which individuals would have an expectation of privacy will not be viewed by anyone other than authorised persons. 9.6 Recorded material will only be used for the purposes defined in this policy. 9.7 Access to recorded material will be in accordance with policy and procedures. 9.8 Information will not be disclosed for commercial or entertainment purposes. 9.9 Access to recorded images will be restricted to staff that require access in order to achieve the purpose(s) defined in this policy. 9.10 Viewing of the recorded images will take place in a restricted area.
10.0 Access to recorded images
10.1 Access to recorded images will be restricted to the Entertainment & Business/Operations Manager or designated member of staff who will decide whether to allow requests for access by third parties in accordance with the disclosure policy. Those requests must be in writing.
11.0 Monitoring employees
11.1 The system will record images of employees during the course of the general surveillance. The main purpose of the CCTV is to prevent and detect crime and it is not designed to be used for monitoring the amount of work done or compliance with company procedures. However if there is a breach in Council/Site procedures then recorded images may be used for reference/evidence purposes.
12.0 Access to data by third parties
12.1 Access to images by third parties will only be allowed in limited and prescribed circumstances. 12.2 Requests for information will be dealt with according to Section 29 & 35 of The Data Protection Act 1998
12.3 Applications must be in the form of a Subject Access Request – see Appendix C
13.0 Recorded Material Management
13.1 Images not required for the purpose(s) for which the equipment is being used will not be retained for no longer than is necessary. The detail as to how long data should be held will be defined within the service retention schedule. While images are retained access to and security of the images will be controlled in accordance with the requirements of the Data Protection Act.
13.2 Recorded material should be of high quality. In order for recorded material to be admissible in evidence the integrity and continuity must be maintained at all times.
13.3 Security measures will be taken to prevent unauthorised access to, alteration, disclosure, accidental loss or destruction of recorded material.
13.4 Recorded material will not be released to organisations outside the ownership of the system other than for training purposes or under the guidelines referred to previously.
13.5 Images retained for evidential purposes will be retained in a secure place where access is controlled – safe or locked cupboard in the management office.
13.6 The system records features such as the location of the camera and/or date and time reference.
13.7 In order to ensure that clear images are recorded at all times the equipment for making recordings will be maintained in good working order with regular servicing in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.
14.0 Recorded Material Register
14.1 There will be a register documenting the access to recorded media.
15.0 Documentation
15.1 Log books must be sequential in order that pages or entries cannot be removed and full and accurate records kept.
15.2 The following administrative documents shall be maintained:
- Media tracking register
- occurrence/incident book
- visitors register
- maintenance of equipment, whether routine or breakdown
- list of installed equipment Appendix A – Camera detail and locations
Camera 1: Main entrance right pointing left - External mini-dome Day/Night Camera 2: Main entrance left pointing right - External mini-dome Day/Night Camera 3: Box office right pointing left – internal mini-dome Day/Night Camera 4: Box office left pointing right – internal mini-dome Day/Night Camera 5: Rear entrance right pointing left - External mini-dome Day/Night Camera 6: Rear entrance left pointing right - External mini-dome Day/Night Camera 7: Pillar Room behind bar right, pointing left – Internal mini-dome Day/Night Camera 8: Pillar Room behind bar left, pointing right – Internal mini-dome Day/Night
The cameras detailed above monitor the main entrances, exits and bar producing images of sufficient quality to support any evidence for a prosecution or legal action.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1646-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 5,
"total-input-tokens": 11326,
"total-output-tokens": 2619,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3278,
1
],
[
3278,
5798,
2
],
[
5798,
8496,
3
],
[
8496,
10566,
4
],
[
10566,
11389,
5
]
]
} |
37c185b0218f914d55cf82e1b07cb6d2f67982aa | CCTV Code of Practice for Pittville Pump Room v2 April 2014
This code of practice has been compiled using the principles and definitions laid out in the main Cheltenham Borough Council Policy.
This Code along with the policy above gives detail and provides guidance on the appropriate and effective use of surveillance camera systems and in particular how it meets the requirements of;
- the Data Protection Act 1998. (1998 Act)
- the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. (2000 Act)
- the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012. (2012 Act)
- Information Commissioners CCTV Code of Practice
- Surveillance Commissioners, Surveillance Camera Code of Practice.
- Information Security Policy
- Data Protection Policy
- Guidance and processes in relation to The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA)
1.1. Management of the scheme
1.1 A privacy impact assessment has been carried out to assess the need and requirements of CCTV systems within Pittville Pump Room and its associated facilities. Cameras have been sited to capture images which are relevant to the protection of the business and customers of Pittville Pump Room. This assessment is reviewed on an annual basis by the Entertainment & Business Manager/Operations Manager.
1.2 There are 9 cameras covering all major entrance/exits and other key areas such as external walkways, box office, car park and bandstand and are sited to capture images which are relevant to the identified aims of the scheme. Details of the cameras and their locations are detailed in appendix A.
1.3 The scheme will be operated using overt cameras which are sited so as not to intrude unreasonably on members of the public or staff. The CCTV scheme seeks to comply with both the Data Protection Act 1988 and the Commissioners code of practice.
1.4 Pittville Pump Room owners and users of the system will treat any viewed and/or recorded material as being confidential.
1.5 Staff who have authorised access are aware of the purpose(s) for which the scheme has been established and that the CCTV equipment is only used to achieve the identified purposes which are the detection and prevention of crime and the prosecution of offenders.
2.0 Scheme and Signage
2.1 This scheme aims to provide surveillance of the public areas in and around Pittville Pump Room in order to fulfil the purposes of the scheme as listed above. The area protected by CCTV will be indicated by the presence of signs. The signs will be placed so that the public are aware that they are entering a zone which is covered by surveillance equipment. The signs will state the organisation responsible for the scheme (Pittville Pump Room), the purposes of the scheme (Crime prevention and public safety) and a contact telephone number (01242 521621).
2.2 Data will not be held for longer than necessary and disposal of information will be regulated by the Operations Manager. The disposal of records happens as part of a managed process and is adequately documented within the service document retention schedule.
2.3 Point of contact 2.4 The Code of Practice for Pittville Pump Room informs the public on how to make contact with the owners of the scheme. For additional information write to: Operations Manager, Cheltenham Town Hall, Imperial Square, Cheltenham GL50 1QA
3.0 Release of information to the public
3.1 Information will be released to third parties: The Police or any other authorised organisation, who can show legitimate reasons for access. They will be required to request any information with reasons in writing and identify themselves.
3.2 Information will be released if the reasons are deemed acceptable, the request and release of information complies with current legislation and on condition that the information is not used for any other purpose than that specified.
3.3 Individuals may request to view information concerning them held on record in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.
3.4 Applications must be in the form of a CCTV Subject Access Request - available on the Cheltenham Borough Council transparency website
4.0 Release of information to statutory prosecuting bodies
4.1 Requests for information will be dealt with according to Section 29 & 35 of The Data Protection Act 1998
4.2 Applications must be in the form of a CCTV Subject Access Request - available on the Cheltenham Borough Council transparency website
5.0 System Registration
5.1 All Council systems must be registered with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) and it is the responsibility of service managers to ensure that these are kept up to date. Any amendments to the scheme that result in the need to update the ICO register must be forwarded to the Customer Relations Team.
6.0 Accountability
6.1 Pittville Pump Room and Cheltenham Borough Council support the principle that the community at large should be satisfied that the Public CCTV systems are being used, managed and controlled in a responsible and accountable manner and that in order to meet this objective there will be independent assessment and scrutiny.
6.2 A member of the public wishing to make a complaint about the system may do so through the Cheltenham Borough Council complaints procedure or contacting Cheltenham Town Hall directly by writing to the Entertainment & Business Manager.
6.3 A copy of the Code of Practice will be made available to anyone on request by contacting either the (Entertainment & Business Manager or Operations Manager at Cheltenham Town Hall)
7.0 CCTV Control Management and Operation
7.1 The system is located in a locked office.
7.2 Only those persons with a legitimate purpose will be permitted to access the recording and monitoring system. 7.3 Access to the system may be required by
- Authorised Personnel (including Council Representatives)
- Police officers to view a particular incident for intelligence or evidential purposes. These visits will take place by prior appointment.
- Engineers of our nominated contractor for maintenance purposes
7.4 Inspectors/Auditors may visit the monitoring and recording facility without prior appointment.
7.5 All visits by authorised persons requiring access to the system will be logged.
8.0 Observation and recording of incidents
8.1 Recording will be 24 hours per day, 7 days a week. The system will be monitored on the basis of operational need. Images will be held for 14 days and then over recorded.
9.0 Privacy And Disclosure Issues
9.1 Cameras will not be used to infringe individual’s rights of privacy. The cameras are sited where they will not be capable of viewing any private areas.
9.2 All employees will be aware of the restrictions set out in this Code of Practice in relation to access to and disclosure of recorded images
9.3 Images not required for the purposes of the scheme will not be retained longer than necessary
9.4 The Operations Manager will only disclose to third parties who intend processing the data for purposes which are deemed compatible with the objectives of the CCTV system
9.5 Monitors displaying images from areas in which individuals would have an expectation of privacy will not be viewed by anyone other than authorised persons.
9.6 Recorded material will only be used for the purposes defined in this policy.
9.7 Access to recorded material will be in accordance with policy and procedures.
9.8 Information will not be disclosed for commercial or entertainment purposes.
9.9 Access to recorded images will be restricted to staff that require access in order to achieve the purpose(s) defined in this policy.
9.10 Viewing of the recorded images will take place in a restricted area.
10.0 Access to recorded images
10.1 Access to recorded images will be restricted to the Entertainment & Business/Operations Manager or designated member of staff who will decide whether to allow requests for access by third parties in accordance with the disclosure policy. Those requests must be in writing.
11.0 Monitoring employees
11.1 The system will record images of employees during the course of the general surveillance. The main purpose of the CCTV is to prevent and detect crime and it is not designed to be used for monitoring the amount of work done or compliance with company procedures. However if there is a breach in Council/Site procedures then recorded images may be used for reference/evidence purposes. 12.0 Access to data by third parties
12.1 Access to images by third parties will only be allowed in limited and prescribed circumstances.
12.2 Requests for information will be dealt with according to Section 29 & 35 of The Data Protection Act 1998
12.3 Applications must be in the form of a Subject Access Request – see Appendix C
13.0 Recorded Material Management
13.1 Images not required for the purpose(s) for which the equipment is being used will not be retained for longer than is necessary. The detail as to how long data should be held will be defined within the service retention schedule. While images are retained access to and security of the images will be controlled in accordance with the requirements of the Data Protection Act.
13.2 Recorded material should be of high quality. In order for recorded material to be admissible in evidence the integrity and continuity must be maintained at all times.
13.3 Security measures will be taken to prevent unauthorised access to, alteration, disclosure, accidental loss or destruction of recorded material.
13.4 Recorded material will not be released to organisations outside the ownership of the system other than for training purposes or under the guidelines referred to previously.
13.5 Images retained for evidential purposes will be retained in a secure place where access is controlled – safe or locked cupboard in the management office.
13.6 The system records features such as the location of the camera and/or date and time reference.
13.7 In order to ensure that clear images are recorded at all times the equipment for making recordings will be maintained in good working order with regular servicing in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions.
14.0 Documentation
14.1 Log books must be sequential in order that pages or entries cannot be removed and full and accurate records kept.
14.2 The following administrative documents shall be maintained:
- occurrence/incident book
- visitors register
- maintenance of equipment, whether routine or breakdown
- list of installed equipment Appendix A – Camera detail and locations
Camera 1: Rear car park pointing South - Vista external multi-directional and zoom
Camera 2: East corner of South Colonnade pointing West – Vista External VR Minidome Day/Night
Camera 3: East corner of South Colonnade pointing North – Vista External VR Minidome Day/Night
Camera 4: West corner of South Colonnade pointing west – Vista External VR Minidome Day/Night
Camera 5: North corner of West Colonnade pointing South – Vista External VR Minidome Day/Night
Camera 6: East corner of South Colonnade multi directional Vista External VR Minidome Day/Night
Camera 7: East corner of South Colonnade pointing South-West at bandstand multi directional Vista External VR Minidome Day/Night
Camera 8: Reception area monitoring main door – Vista Internal mini dome Day/Night
Camera 9: Box Office monitoring the cash handling area - Vista Internal mini dome Day/Night
The cameras detailed above monitor the 4 main aspects of the building covering entrances and exits and produce images of sufficient quality to support any evidence.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1647-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 5,
"total-input-tokens": 11113,
"total-output-tokens": 2645,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3055,
1
],
[
3055,
5706,
2
],
[
5706,
8378,
3
],
[
8378,
10453,
4
],
[
10453,
11529,
5
]
]
} |
f410a5975513eae826a8886405014706667d3eef | Dear Sirs,
**Enforcement Notice-Land at Mickleden Edge, Midhope Moor, Bradfield**
I refer to your letter of 6 November addressed to the Development Management Service (Andrew Cook) and I note that your client is now appealing the enforcement notice.
The authority is in the process of appointing counsel and this is an interim reply to you letter which deals with some of the matters which you raise. The remaining matters will be addressed shortly and, probably, directly by Mr Cook or another member of the planning team, and perhaps if you want to supplement you queries having read the enforcement report, you would let Mr Cook know directly.
1. The authority does not accept that the resolutions are contradictory. The resolution of the June committee that an appropriate assessment was not necessary was on the basis that the potential significant effect on the designated site could be controlled by planning condition including that the development be permitted for a limited time period. The 15 June 2018 committee also resolved that if the authority was minded to grant permission on a permanent basis, then the application would need to be subject to a habitats regulation assessment. This is consistent with the resolution of the 14 September 2018 committee, in that an appropriate assessment would be necessary in the event of a ground A appeal.
2. I confirm that the competent authority in respect of any likely effect on a designated site, if the appeal is validated, will be the Secretary of State. I enclose a copy of the enforcement report and the standing order officer scheme of delegation. Put simply, the decision to issue the enforcement notice is that of the head of development management as indicated in the minute for the 14 September 2018 planning committee meeting and the officer delegation scheme. The assistant solicitor approves the decision and then signs the notice under the delegated officer scheme.
It will be the case that some of your points, for instance that you view the notice as a nullity, will be more fully addressed after counsel has reviewed the matter, but it is not accepted that the notice is in fact a nullity as it does not necessarily require you client to commit any criminal offences.
Thank you in anticipation of your forbearance.
Yours faithfully,
R S J Cooper Assistant solicitor Normal working days Thursday and Fridays. DELEGATED ENFORCEMENT REPORT
Case Officer: Andrew Cook
Enforcement Ref: 15/0057
Date of Report: 19 September 2018
Core Strategy Policies: GSP3, L1, L2.
Local Plan Policies: LC1, LC17.
List of Background Papers (not previously published): Nil
1. Introduction:
1.1 This report seeks authority to commence formal enforcement action in respect of the construction of a surfaced track.
2. Site and Surroundings
2.1 Midhope Moors lies near the north-eastern edge of the National Park and to the south-west of the villages of Langsett and Upper Midhope. The Moors are designated as section 3 Moorland, as defined in the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981, and are also part of the Dark Peak Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) which extends across more than 30,000 ha of wild, open and continuous moorland in the north of the National Park. The SSSI citation states that “the combination of plateaux, blanket mires, wet and dry heaths and acid grasslands, together with associated flushes and mires on moorland slopes, represents an extensive tract of semi-natural upland vegetation typical of and including the full range of moorland vegetation of the South Pennines.” It goes on to state that “the Dark Peak moorlands support the full range of breeding birds found in the South Pennines, some of which are represented at their southern most viable English locations” and that “the moorland breeding bird assemblage is of great regional and national importance.” The breeding birds found in the SSSI include internationally important populations of several species listed in the European Commission Birds Directive as requiring special conservation measures. The land is also designated as a Special Area of Conservation (SAC), as defined in the European Union’s Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC), and a Special Protection Area (SPA) under the European Union Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds. 2.2 In common with most of the upland areas in the National Park, the land is also open access land under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, which means that, subject to certain exceptions, the public normally has a right to roam on foot without keeping to public rights of way. The track, which is the subject of this report, is bisected by the Cut Gate Bridleway, a north-south route across the moors which is very popular with walkers, cyclists and horse riders and which runs from Langsett Reservoir southwards to the Upper Derwent at the northern end of Howden Reservoir. The Authority’s Landscape Strategy and Action Plan places the site within the Moorland slopes and cloughs landscape character type within the Dark Peak landscape character area.
2.3 The track in question essentially straddles Mickleden Clough near the top of the moor some 2.8km south-west of Upper Midhope. It comprises of an approx. 700m long sinuous section of a longer access route running roughly east-west from ‘Lost Lad’ down over the Cut Gate Bridleway and across Mickleden Beck, rising to the lower slopes of Harden Moss around 230m west of the Beck.
3. Relevant history:
3.1 2016 - Planning application submitted for retention of access matting but subsequently deemed invalid, principally due to inaccurate plans.
3.2 25 June 2018 – Retrospective planning application refused (ref: NP/S/1217/1304). The submitted application described the proposal as ‘retrospective planning consent on Midhope Moor to restore and repair previously damaged access route to include the laying of plastic access mesh to facilitate vehicular access.’
4. The breach of planning control:
4.1 The track consists of a two metre wide strip of green plastic ground reinforcement mesh (or matting) held down by metal pins. For most of its length it has been laid alongside a former rutted unsurfaced track but for some sections it has been laid on the line of the former route. The plastic mesh surface was laid in late 2014 or early 2015 to reinforce the route for vehicular access to the moor west of the site where works to conserve and enhance the moor had been consented by Natural England. At the western end it has been widened to 4m over a 20m section. There are two short breaks in the matting where the track crosses the Cut Gate Path and Mickleden Beck. Since it was laid the underlying vegetation has grown through to varying degrees along its length.
4.2 The construction methodology submitted with the recent retrospective application states that a tracked vehicle was used to level undulations in the ground with a 45m long steep section near the Cut Gate bridleway manipulated by inverting the ground level material to create a level surface on which the matting was laid. Loose rutted stone was flattened out and existing material realigned along the route and consolidated; old wooden structures in the wetter areas were removed. The methodology stated that in the wet flush sections laying of log rafts may be required in due course. Indeed, since the submission of the planning application, some log ‘rafts’ have been laid over the matting on some sections.
4.3 It is considered that the works carried out to surface the route, including the ground preparation, laying of the matting and the more recent overlaying of log ‘rafts’ along some sections, amounted to an engineering operation and thus constituted ‘development’, as defined in section 55 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (‘the 1990 Act’).
4.4 Class E of Part 9 of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (‘the GPDO’) permits the carrying out on land within the boundaries of an unadopted street or private way of works required for the maintenance or improvement of the street or way. In this case it may be argued that, when the works were carried out in 2014, the route in question was a private way and that the works amounted to maintenance or improvement of the way. It is understood that prior to the surfacing works taking place in late 2014, there was a pre-existing route comprising of an unsurfaced track which had become rutted and eroded through vehicle use. However, for most of its length, the current surfaced track runs alongside the previous route. For this reason, the permitted development rights in Part 9 would not apply as the works must take place within the boundaries of the private way in order to qualify as permitted development.
4.5 If the former route was a private way, and the works had taken place within its boundaries, the works did not, in the Authority’s view, constitute maintenance or improvement so could not benefit from the provisions in Part 9. In coming to this conclusion, the Authority has relied on Counsel’s opinion that where there is a fundamental alteration to the character of a private way resulting from the carrying out of surfacing works, of the sort carried out here, then it is possible that those works would fall outside the scope of Part 9. This could be because of not only the fundamental change in construction and surfacing of the way but the change in the appearance of the way in the landscape. In other words, environmental amenity can be an aspect of ‘character’ and therefore can be a factor in considering whether the character of the way is so changed by the works to be something different, thus taking the works outside the ambit of Part 9.
4.6 It is considered that the works undertaken in 2014 resulted in a significant change in the construction and surfacing of the route and in its appearance in the landscape compared to its condition immediately prior to the works being carried out. As a result, it became significantly more visible in the landscape and has had a greater detrimental impact on the character and appearance of the area. The significant change in the character and appearance of the route has been exacerbated by the recent addition of log ‘rafts’. It follows that the works are beyond the scope of ‘maintenance or improvement’ in Part 9 and that express planning permission should have been sought and secured.
4.7 A further consideration with regard to permitted development rights is that regulation 75 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 states as follows:
‘General development orders
75. It is a condition of any planning permission granted by a general development order made on or after 30th November 2017, that development which—
(a) is likely to have a significant effect on a European site or a European offshore marine site (either alone or in combination with other plans or projects), and (b) is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site,
must not be begun until the developer has received written notification of the approval of the local planning authority under regulation 77 (approval of local planning authority).
In this case, the Authority considers that the development has had a significant effect on a European site (that is, an SPA and SAC) and that the development is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of the site. As written notification of the Authority’s approval under regulation 77 was not sought or received before the development was begun, the condition set out in regulation 75 has not been met. For this reason, the development could not qualify as permitted development under the GPDO. 4.8 As referred to in paragraph 3.2, above, a retrospective planning application for the laying of plastic access mesh to facilitate vehicular access was refused in June 2018. On the application form that was submitted with the application the applicant stated that work on the development started on 1 December 2014. The timing of the works is corroborated by photographs on the Authority’s file which it is understood were taken on 30 November 2014 and which show that on that date the surfaced track, consisting of geotextile matting, had not been laid. A later set of photographs, that it is understood were taken on 3 January 2015, show only part of the route surfaced with geotextile matting so the works were not complete at that time. In the light of this information, the Authority considers that the development was not substantially complete more than four years ago so it is not immune from enforcement action by virtue of section 171B of the 1990 Act.
5. **Assessment of Expediency**
5.1 Section 172(1) of the 1990 Act states as follows:
(1) The local planning authority may issue a notice (in this Act referred to as an “enforcement notice”) where it appears to them—
(a) that there has been a breach of planning control; and
(b) that it is expedient to issue the notice, having regard to the provisions of the development plan and to any other material considerations.
5.2 In order to make an assessment as to whether it would be expedient to take enforcement action against the unauthorised development it is necessary to consider any harm that is caused and whether the development is in accordance with the relevant national and local planning policies.
5.3 National Park designation is the highest level of landscape designation in the UK. The Environment Act 1995 sets out two statutory purposes for national parks in England and Wales:
- Conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage
- Promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of national parks by the public
5.4 When national parks carry out these purposes they also have a duty to seek to foster the economic and social well-being of local communities within the national parks.
**Revised National Planning Policy Framework**
5.5 The Revised National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) was published on 24 July 2018. The Government’s intention is that the document should be considered to be a material consideration and carry particular weight where a development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date. In the National Park, the development plan comprises the Authority’s Core Strategy 2011 and saved policies in the Peak District National Park Local Plan 2001.
5.6 Paragraph 170 of the Framework says that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by (amongst other things) protecting and enhancing valued landscape and sites of biodiversity value. 5.7 Paragraph 171 says that Plans should: distinguish between the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites and take a strategic approach to maintaining and enhancing networks of habitats and green infrastructure.
5.8 Paragraph 172 says that great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty which have the highest status of protection in relation to these issues. The conservation and enhancement of wildlife and cultural heritage are also important considerations in these areas, and should also be given great weight in National Parks and the Broads. The scale and extent of development within these designated areas should be limited.
5.9 Paragraph 174 says that to protect and enhance biodiversity and geodiversity, plans should:
(a) Identify, map and safeguard components of local wildlife-rich habitats and wider ecological networks, including the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites of importance for biodiversity; wildlife corridors and stepping stones that connect them; and areas identified by national and local partnerships for habitat management, enhancement, restoration or creation; and
(b) Promote the conservation, restoration and enhancement of priority habitats, ecological networks and the protection and recovery of priority species; and identify and pursue opportunities for securing measurable net gains for biodiversity.
5.10 Paragraph 207 states as follows:
"Effective enforcement is important as a means of maintaining public confidence in the planning system. Enforcement action is discretionary, and local planning authorities should act proportionately in responding to suspected breaches of planning control. They should consider publishing a local enforcement plan to manage enforcement proactively, in a way that is appropriate to their area. This should set out how they will monitor the implementation of planning permissions, investigate alleged cases of unauthorised development and take action where it is appropriate to do so."
Development Plan
5.11 Core Strategy policy L1 says that all development must conserve and enhance valued landscape character as identified in the Landscape Strategy and Action Plan and other valued characteristics. This policy also states that other than in exceptional circumstances, proposals for development in the Natural Zone will not be permitted. The Natural Zone, as defined in the Development Plan, covers wilder areas with minimal obvious human influence whose 'more natural' beauty it is, in the opinion of the Authority, particularly important to conserve. The unauthorised development in this case is within the Natural Zone.
5.12 Policy L2 states, amongst other things, that development must conserve and enhance any sites, features or species of biodiversity importance and where appropriate their setting. It goes on to say that other than in exceptional circumstances development will not be permitted where it is likely to have an adverse impact on any sites, features or species of biodiversity importance or their setting that have statutory designation or are of international or national importance for their biodiversity. 5.13 The exceptional circumstances in which development can take place in the Natural Zone are explained in Local Plan policy LC1. That policy states that the exceptional circumstances are those in which a suitable, more acceptable location cannot be found elsewhere and the development is essential:
(i) in the national interest; or (ii) for the management of the Natural Zone; or (iii) for the conservation or enhancement of the National Park’s valued characteristics.
5.14 Policy LC1 goes on to say that development that would serve only to make land management or access easier will not be regarded as essential.
5.15 Policy LC17 sets out the detailed policy for sites, features or species of wildlife importance. Where there are statutory designations of international, national or regional importance it requires development applications to be carefully considered to assess the likelihood of adverse effects and states that development considered likely to have an adverse effect will be treated as if that effect is established. In particular, the policy says, development having a significant effect on the ecological objectives or integrity of a Special Protection Area or Special Area of Conservation will not be permitted unless there is no alternative site or better practical approach available, and it must be carried out for imperative reasons of overriding public interest. Policy LC17 also sets out the information required to be submitted in relation to development on statutorily protected sites or development likely to affect a protected site or species.
5.16 Part 2 of the Local Plan for the Peak District National Park, which the Authority is calling the Development Management Policies Document (“the DMPD”), will guide and manage development across the National Park alongside our adopted Core Strategy up to 2026 and will replace the remaining policies in the Local Plan adopted in 2001. Following the consultation stages the published version of the DMPD and Policies Map, along with an addendum of modifications, was submitted to the Secretary of State on 19 February 2018. An inspector appointed by the Secretary of State conducted an examination into the DMPD between 24 and 30 May 2018.
5.17 Policy DMC1 of the DMPD states, amongst other things, that development which would not respect, would adversely affect, or would lead to undesirable changes in landscape character or any other valued characteristics of the site and the area will not be permitted.
5.18 Policy DMC2 states, amongst other things, that the exceptional circumstances in which development is permissible in the Natural Zone are those in which a suitable, more acceptable location cannot be found elsewhere and the development is essential: (i) for the management of the Natural Zone; or (ii) for the conservation and/or enhancement of the National Park’s valued characteristics. It also states that development that would serve only to make land management or access easier will not be regarded as essential.
5.19 Policy DMC 11 requires, amongst other things, that proposals should aim to achieve no net loss of biodiversity as a result of development. In considering whether a proposal conserves and enhances sites, features or species of wildlife importance all reasonable measures must be taken to avoid net loss by demonstrating that the following matters have been taken into consideration:
(i) enhancement proportionate to the development; (ii) no alternative sites exist that cause less harm; (iii) adverse effects have been avoided; (iv) appropriate mitigation; and (v) in rare cases, as a last resort, compensation measures to offset loss. 5.20 The Peak District Landscape Strategy and Action Plan (2009), is one of several strategies which set out in more detail how the National Park Management Plan will be delivered. It is underpinned by a Park-wide Landscape Character Assessment. Although the Strategy and Action Plan are not formally part of the Development Plan, the Core Strategy states (in paragraph 9.4) that it forms a strong material consideration when making planning decisions. The DMPD introduces a 'Landscape First' approach, using the Landscape Strategy and Action Plan to assess whether the character and quality of the landscape will be conserved and enhanced by a development. The development which is the subject of this report is within the Dark Peak Landscape Character Area and straddles two Landscape Character Types, namely Moorland Slopes and Cloughs and Open Moors.
Application of policies
5.21 It is considered that the three key issues in this case are, firstly, whether the unauthorised development causes harm to the character and appearance of the landscape; secondly, whether any of the exceptions for development in the Natural Zone would apply and, thirdly, whether the development is compatible with the policies on biodiversity in light of the statutory designations that are in place.
Issue 1: Landscape character and appearance
5.22 The development is situated in an elevated and prominent position in an area of very attractive open moorland and is clearly visible from the Cut Gate bridleway. As the public has a right to roam on foot, without being confined to public rights of way, the development is also visible to the public from a much wider area. When it was laid it was a bright, almost turquoise green colour which was an extremely visible feature in the landscape running almost from horizon to horizon in the field of view. In this open moorland landscape, the matting stood out as a stridently different and significantly intrusive and incongruous man-made feature causing significant harm to the scenic quality of the moorland landscape.
5.23 Since the matting was laid, the colour has faded a little and due to the seeding, liming and fertilising regime followed by the owner, the underlying vegetation (mainly grass) has grown through the open weave to varying degrees. The net result is a mixed appearance along the length with some sections of lush green grass across the full width, whereas other sections are relatively bare of through growth with the plastic matting being the predominant feature. In other sections, in addition to the grass sward, heather is growing through.
5.24 Whilst it must be acknowledged that the matting has been obscured to a degree over time by the vegetation since it was first laid in 2014, nevertheless it can still be clearly seen over long sections and in close views where it is an incongruous and intrusive feature on an otherwise open moor. Even where the matting has been largely hidden by the vegetation the resulting route appears mainly as a grass rich, green swathe running through the very contrasting darker heather moorland vegetation either side of the route. The difference in appearance is marked and this green strip has become a landscape feature which detracts considerably from the established and valued character and appearance of the dark peak moorland. The harmful impact of the development has been exacerbated by the recent addition of log 'rafts'.
5.25 In conclusion, the unauthorised development fails to respect or enhance the character of its surroundings and has a significant harmful effect on the character and appearance of the landscape in this part of the National Park in conflict with the relevant policies – notably paragraph 115 of the NPPF, Core Strategy policy L1 and DMPD policy DMC1.
Issue 2: Natural Zone
5.26 As referenced above, the Authority’s policies state that other than in exceptional circumstances, proposals for development in the Natural Zone will not be permitted. The exceptional circumstances are set out in Local Plan policy LC1 and refined in the DMPD. In policy DMC2 of the DMPD the national interest exception, set out in policy LC1, is not included.
5.27 The explanation set out in the supporting statement that was submitted with the recent planning application is that the matting was laid to facilitate safe access and egress to land west of Mickleden Beck whilst undertaking moorland restoration works agreed under a Higher Level Stewardship agreement consented in 2014 and for works taking place between 2014 and 2017. Furthermore, the supporting statement states that retention of the matting is required to facilitate future land management. It is understood that the surfacing work was consented by Natural England in association with the moorland restoration works. These restoration works are welcomed as they accord with national and local policies seeking to bring the moorland back into favourable condition. It is very likely that the existence of a newly-surfaced route, which could be used all year round, will have reduced vehicle erosion – both on the route itself and on the adjacent areas. That is a benefit in terms of landscape character and appearance, although it may have been possible to achieve that result through other means. It is worth noting, for example, that significant moorland restoration works have been carried out across the Peak District and South Pennines by the Moors for the Future Partnership without the necessity for formal tracks. In any event, the restoration works are now complete and the laying of the matting and the associated groundwork to facilitate “safe access” are not works that are essential to the conservation or enhancement of the natural zone or for the conservation and/or enhancement of the National Park’s valued characteristics.
5.28 Notwithstanding the emerging DMP, no case has been made that retention of the matting is essential development in the national interest.
5.29 For these reasons, it is considered that the development does not fall within the exceptions set out in policy LC1 of the Local Plan, or as refined in the DMPD. It therefore conflicts with the general presumption against development in the Natural Zone as set out in core strategy policy L1.
Issue 3: Biodiversity
5.30 Midhope Moor is identified as of national and international importance for its biodiversity and this is recognised in its designation as a SSSI, SPA and SAC, as referred to above. The SPA is classified under Article 4.1 of the Wild Birds Directive for breeding population of Merlin and Golden Plover. As well as upland bird interest, there are historical records of water vole along Mickleden Beck.
5.31 According to the Authority’s records, the track is located on modified blanket bog habitat and skirts around a flush to the north of the site. Natural England have provided a detailed breakdown of habitat that the route covers, as follows:
| Habitat Type | Area | |-------------------------------|-------| | Dry heath | 320m² | | Dry heath/acid grassland | 380m² | | Bracken | 110m² | Marshy grassland/juncus flush 360m² Flush/stony ground/river bed 50m² Blanket bog 100m²
5.32 The Authority’s ecologist, when consulted on the recent retrospective planning application, stated that a permanent track could not be justified on ecological grounds as it was not necessary for management of the site in the long term and was likely to have a significant effect on a European site. She stated that, in addition to loss of habitat, it was likely that compaction and hydrological damage had occurred through the construction method that had been used (levelling the route with a tracked vehicle and the inversion technique that was carried out along 45m of the route). She advised that continued use would also exacerbate this problem. She considered that it would be difficult to avoid harm through modifications, conditions or restrictions and that restrictions on track use in terms of type of vehicle use would be impossible to enforce. She also referred to a comment by NE that the surfacing may lead to an increased use in preference to other informal tracks in the area.
5.33 In her response the Ecologist also stated that a temporary track to support moorland restoration works could be justified on ecological grounds but only if there were no alternative means of carrying out the restoration, such as airlifts or alternative routes etc. However, no detailed analysis of alternatives appears to have been carried out and, in the absence of evidence to the contrary it must be assumed that the track is intended to be a permanent development. The recent application sought permanent retention of the track.
5.34 In its consultation response to the recent planning application, Natural England indicated support for temporary retention of the track, in connection with moorland restoration works, subject to appropriate mitigation being secured. As indicated above, however, no details of future restoration works or a likely timescale have been provided. Natural England also advised that if the Authority was considering granting permanent permission then, without appropriate mitigation, the development would have an adverse effect on the integrity of the SAC and the SPA and would damage or destroy the interest features for which the Dark Peak SSSI has been notified.
5.35 In conclusion, it is considered that the unauthorised development has resulted in an adverse impact on the designated site and is thus in conflict with the relevant policies – notably paragraph 115 of the NPPF, Core Strategy Policy L2 and Local Plan policy LC17.
5.36 Enforcement action to secure removal of the track and appropriate restoration has the potential to affect the special interest features of the SPA and SAC. Under the Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC), the Authority is required to consider whether the potential effects are significant enough to mean that the works required by the enforcement notice should be subject to an appropriate assessment. The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2017 (‘the Habitats Regulations’), which implement the Directive in the UK, refer to this as the ‘Likely Significant Effect Test’. On 14 September 2018, the Authority’s Planning Committee considered a report on this and resolved as follows:
1. The unauthorised development is likely to have a significant effect on the SPA and SAC and the special qualities for which they are designated and that in the event of a ground A appeal against an enforcement notice the development would need to be subject to an appropriate assessment.
2. The proposed enforcement action to secure removal of the track and restoration, as set out below and subject to minor amendments to the wording to be delegated to the Head of Development Management and only to be carried out in the months September to February (inclusive), is not likely to have a significant effect on the SPA and SAC and the special qualities for which they are designated and would not, therefore, need to be subject to an appropriate assessment.
a) Place between 46 cubic metres and 50 cubic metres of locally sourced heather brash, which has been collected between 1 October and 31 January in the previous year, alongside the Land. The heather brash shall be placed in bags or piles between 14 and 18 metres apart with each bag or pile consisting of between 1 and 1.5 cubic metres of heather brash.
b) Following the completion of step a), remove the geotextile matting, wooden log ‘rafts’ and any other imported materials used in construction of the track from the Land. The removal shall either be carried out by hand or using low ground pressure tracked vehicles, equipment or machinery. The removal shall commence at the north-west end of the Land and shall progress in a generally south-easterly direction along the Land until all of the geotextile matting, wooden log ‘rafts’ and any other imported materials used in the construction of the track have been removed.
c) Following the completion of step b), spread the heather brash by hand over the Land to a depth of between 1.5 and 2.5 centimetres.
d) Following the completion of step c), plant sphagnum moss plugs by hand at a density of one plug per 5 square metres over the parts of the Land where the wooden log ‘rafts’ have been removed.
e) Any parts of the Land which, twenty months after this Notice takes effect, have more than 30% grass cover per square metre shall be sprayed with a grass-specific, selective herbicide.
**Human Rights and Equalities Issues:**
In determining whether to take enforcement action, consideration must be given to the rights and freedoms afforded by the Human Rights Act 1998. Planning Practice Guidance indicates that enforcement action is compatible with the Convention on Human Rights.
**Which and Who’s Human Rights are affected?**
| Article no. | Does the decision affect a right | Yes | No | If so, how and who is affected | |-------------|----------------------------------|-----|----|--------------------------------| | Article 6 | Have the owners had a fair trial?| No | | The recipient of an enforcement notice has a right to appeal to the Planning Inspectorate on the planning merits. It is only if that is not done, or the appeal is lost, and the enforcement notice is not complied with that a criminal offence is committed. A case would then be brought before the Court for a trial (the Magistrates initially), and there is a right of appeal from the decision. | | Article 8 | Would the action interfere with | No | | | | Relevant Article | Exception | |------------------|-----------| | Article 6 | The recipients of the notice will not have had the right to a fair trial with the service of the notice; however, the recipient retains the right to appeal the Notice to the Planning Inspectorate on the planning merits. | | Article 8 | The Authority is entitled to interfere with this right under the Planning Acts where this action is necessary in a democratic society. In this case, the exception is in the protection of the health, rights and freedom of others. | | Article 1 of the First Protocol | The Authority is entitled to interfere with this right if it is in the public interest and subject to the conditions provided by law. The Authority is entitled to enforce under planning law to control the use of the Land in the public interest. |
How important is the interference with the Human Right? What is the balance of competing interests?
| In favour of proposed course of action | Views of other parties | |--------------------------------------|------------------------| | The action is necessary to safeguard the Planning Acts and control development which if left unchecked will result in harm to the valued characteristics of the National Park. | The legitimate expectation of the public that the Authority will ensure that unauthorised development is controlled and its impact militated against. The recipient may argue that there is a sufficient justification to support the alleged breach and provision for this is afforded under the appeal process, as this relates to the planning merits. |
Recommendation:
That formal enforcement action be AUTHORISED to secure the following:
The steps below ((a) to (f), inclusive) shall only be carried out between 1 September and 28 February, in the following year:
a) Place between 30 and 35 cubic metres of locally sourced heather brash, which has been collected between 1 October and 31 January in the following year, alongside the Land. The heather brash shall be placed in bags or piles between 20 and 50 metres apart with each bag or pile consisting of between 1 and 2 cubic metres of heather brash.
b) Following the completion of step a), remove the geotextile matting, wooden log ‘rafts’ and any other imported materials used in the construction of the track from the Land. The removal shall either be carried out by hand or using low ground pressure tracked vehicles, equipment or machinery. Any equipment or machinery used in the removal shall at all times during the removal works be stationed on the Land. The removal shall commence at the north-west end of the Land and shall progress in a generally south-easterly direction along the Land until all of the geotextile matting, wooden log ‘rafts’ and any other imported materials used in the construction of the track have been removed.
c) Following the completion of step b), spread the heather brash by hand over the Land to a depth of between 1.5 and 2.5 centimetres.
d) Following the completion of step c), plant sphagnum moss plugs by hand at a minimum density of one plug per 5 square metres over the areas where the wooden log ‘rafts’ have been removed. The sphagnum moss plugs shall consist of the following mix, or an equivalent in order to stabilise the peat bog, 10% Sphagnum capillifolium; 10% Sphagnum papillosum; 40% Sphagnum palustre; 30% Sphagnum fallax; 5% Sphagnum cuspidatum; 5% Sphagnum fimbriatum.
Time for compliance for steps a), b), c) and d): Within 12 calendar months of the date when the Notice takes effect.
e) Any parts of the Land which, 30 calendar months after this Notice takes effect, have more than 30% grass cover over any 10 metre long section, shall be sprayed by hand with a grass-specific, selective herbicide.
f) Following the completion of step e), spread heather brash, which has been collected between 1 October and 31 January in the following year, by hand over any areas of grass or bare peat on the Land to a depth of between 1.5 and 2.5 centimetres.
Time for compliance for steps e) and f): Within 42 calendar months of the date when the Notice takes effect.
Authorised By:
........................................ (Head of Development Management)
Date: 20/9/18
........................................ (Assistant Solicitor)
Date: 21/9/18 | PART F | CORPORATE STRATEGY AND DEVELOPMENT | |--------|-----------------------------------| | 7.F-1 | Enforcement Action |
(a) To authorise the issue of enforcement notices, listed building enforcement notices and breach of condition notices in relation to development in breach of planning control.
(b) To authorise the issue of stop notices and temporary stop notices. Before a stop notice is issued consultations shall be held with the Chief Finance Officer to consider the implications of the payment of compensation.
(c) To authorise applications to the Courts for injunctions under Section 187B of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
(d) To issue notices under s215 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990. (Untidy land and buildings).
(e) To apply to the magistrates court for a planning enforcement order under s171BA of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990.
(f) To authorise the execution of works in default under s178 Town and Country Planning Act 1990 where the cost can be accommodated within current budgets or where the cost is expected to be recovered from the landowner.
(g) To authorise the withdrawal of enforcement notices, stop notices, temporary stop notices, listed building enforcement notices, breach of condition notices and s215 notices.
(h) To exercise the power to waive or relax the requirements of an enforcement notice under
| Deputies | |----------| | Director of Corporate Strategy and Development for Head of Law and Head of Finance. | | Development and Planning Managers or Monitoring and Enforcement Manager or Minerals Team Manager for Director of Conservation and Planning. |
| Stop Notices – in consultation with Chief Finance Officer | |----------------------------------------------------------| | Formal signature: Head of Law or Assistant Solicitor |
| Planning Managers or Monitoring and Enforcement Manager or Minerals Team Manager for Director of Conservation and Planning and Director of Corporate Strategy and Development for Head of Law. | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1648-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 16,
"total-input-tokens": 17104,
"total-output-tokens": 9361,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1520,
1
],
[
1520,
2391,
2
],
[
2391,
4302,
3
],
[
4302,
7979,
4
],
[
7979,
11724,
5
],
[
11724,
14702,
6
],
[
14702,
17968,
7
],
[
17968,
21627,
8
],
[
21627,
25246,
9
],
[
25246,
28779,
10
],
[
28779,
32498,
11
],
[
32498,
35334,
12
],
[
35334,
37653,
13
],
[
37653,
39652,
14
],
[
39652,
41877,
15
],
[
41877,
41877,
16
]
]
} |
f403a86ab49a3840934ddeabb4951ae1d0f74946 | Hello Maria
I have been asked to provide a response to the points that you raise in response to some information provided to you by my colleague Louisa Aspden. I was, at the time of the work under discussion, the responsible officer for the SSSI and the HLS agreement.
The work done to place matting along the line of what was an estate access route was completed as part of the capital works plan for the HLS agreement. The aim of the capital works plan was to outline eligible paid for works that furthered the environmental objectives of the agreement. In this case – as was common with large moorland agreements on SSSIs – the objectives were the conservation and enhancement of the special interest. In this plan it was primarily blanket bog restoration.
For straightforward works such as a fence or a wall there is a standard specification, but for more complex and large scale work there is quite often firstly an outline plan covering broad areas and actions and then within that a separate detailed plan/specification is commissioned. In this case DMS (the contractors) developed the plan for the agreement holder to deliver the agreed actions. Within that plan there was some work to repair the route used for access by machines and staff to the works area. So the plan for the repair of the route was embedded in a larger landscape scale restoration plan, and in my mind, I agreed all the work in the plan (subject to any minor modifications agreed with the project manager [Dan Richmond-Watson]). The email exchange around June 2014 describes this.
Re Midhope - Capital Works Management Plan.msg
In agreeing the plan Natural England agreed to the restoration works and the remedial work to the route, not only that, but Natural England paid for the work – or a substantial part of it. At the time Natural England did not have the guidance from PDNPA on planning control and tracks. This was considered to be an estate track and the work was considered minor in that it really didn’t appear to involve heavy engineering work. I think I must have had some awareness of sensibilities since I asked the project manager to keep the repair work off the blanket bog where it might have otherwise continued for 400m, but as I recall my concern was about the precedent of establishing new tracks on blanket bog and I recall I thought the estate track as a single entity stopped short of the butts and the gamekeeper then chose one of a series of directions to progress along depending upon his work.
In 2015 I prepared a casework summary of the process and history (I have edited slightly to add information) I attach this along with the capital works plan, the Habitats Regulations Assessment for the plan and a letter sent by NE to PDNPA when the estate was submitting a retrospective planning application.
If you think I can be of any further assistance please get in touch.
Regards
Richard
Richard Pollitt Conservation and Land Management Adviser – The Dark Peak East Midlands Area Team Natural England
Contractual Home-Worker, Please post mail to: We are here to secure a healthy natural environment for people to enjoy, where wildlife is protected and England’s traditional landscapes are safeguarded for future generations.
In an effort to reduce Natural England’s carbon footprint, I will, wherever possible, avoid travelling to meetings and attend via audio, video or web conferencing.
Natural England is accredited to the Cabinet Office Customer Service Excellence Standard
From: Maria Bowen Sent: 26 February 2019 17:02 To: Aspden, Louisa Subject: RE: Response - Land at Mickleden Edge Request for EIA Screening Opinion Importance: High
Hi Louisa,
Many thanks for your response. From you response you state you have no comments to make, however I would like to just clarify this with you a bit further.
I note from the application that the applicant that that he has a Midhope Moorland Management Plan which covers the application area, this is an agreement that covers Dark Peak SSSI and is made together with the applicant and Natural England.
As I understand it the agreed management plan details the main management of the moorland fulfilling land manager obligations under the High Level Stewardship agreement and the SSSI legislation. The management plan specifically mentions ‘Tracks’ and state that routine management of the track is permitted under this plan: as are repairs to track surfaces if the same materials and methods of the existing surface are used; tracks are not widened or lengthened; drain and drainage channels are not widened and deepened; and, all machinery used complies with specified requirements. It also go on to say that improvements or upgrading of existing tracks will be assessed by examining the effects in the interest features of the SSSI/SAC/SPA and will be agreed if they do not impact significantly on the interest features or affect site integrity. Please see an extract from the HLS agreement below for ref: 4.7 Tracks
Natural England appreciate that tracks may sometimes be necessary to facilitate management on grouse moors including both shooting and grazing management and that they can therefore be required in some situations to achieve or maintain appropriate management.
Existing tracks are shown on map 5. Routine maintenance of existing tracks is permitted under this plan provided:
- repairs to track surfaces use the same materials and methods as the existing surface
- tracks are not widened or lengthened
- drains and drainage channels are not widened or deepened
- all machinery used complies with requirements of section 4.6 (Vehicles) above
The improvement or upgrading of existing tracks will require separate consultation and consent from Natural England.
Proposals for new tracks will be assessed by examining the effects on the interest features of the SSSI/SAC/SPA and will be agreed if they do not impact significantly on the interest features or affect site integrity.
Please can you let me know if Natural England have agreed to the works with the applicant, and confirm the date that this information was given. If you have not agreed to this work what action will be taken now, if any, and also provide me with your view of the work completed. For ease I have re-attached the paperwork that I originally sent you.
Please could you respond by 09/03/19 as this case is also wrapped up in LPA enforcement action and I am being pressed for a decision.
Kind regards, Maria
Maria Bowen MSc | Planning Officer | Planning Casework Unit Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government 1st Floor, Coburg House, Mayflower Street, Plymouth. PL1 1DJ.
Visit us on GOV.UK: https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-housing-communities-and-local-government Twitter - https://twitter.com/mhclg
From: Aspden, Louise Sent: 05 February 2019 11:18 To: Maria Bowen Cc: Deeming, Roslyn Subject: Response - Land at Mickleden Edge Request for EIA Screening Opinion Dear Maria
With apologies for the delay, I attach our response to your request for advice of 3 December 2018.
Yours sincerely
Louisa
Louisa Aspden Team Leader, Sustainable Growth and Marine East Midlands Area Team Natural England Apex Court, City Link, Nottingham, NG2 4LA
www.gov.uk/natural-england
Follow us on Twitter @NEEastMidlands
We are here to secure a healthy natural environment for people to enjoy, where wildlife is protected and England’s traditional landscapes are safeguarded for future generations.
To help developers consider the environment Natural England offers two chargeable services
- the Discretionary Advice Service (DAS), which can provide advice on planning/licensing proposals
- the Pre-submission Screening Service (PSS) for European Protected Species mitigation licence applications.
We now offer free and chargeable advice to land owners and managers planning works on Sites of Special Scientific Interest through the SSSI Advice Service
This email and any attachments is intended for the named recipient only. If you have received it in error you have no authority to use, disclose, store or copy any of its contents and you should destroy it and inform the sender. Whilst this email and associated attachments will have been checked for known viruses whilst within the Natural England systems, we can accept no responsibility once it has left our systems. Communications on Natural England systems may be monitored and/or recorded to secure the effective operation of the system and for other lawful purposes.
This email has been scanned by the Symantec Email Security.cloud service. For more information please visit http://www.symanteccloud.com
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1649-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 4,
"total-input-tokens": 4276,
"total-output-tokens": 1966,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3067,
1
],
[
3067,
4984,
2
],
[
4984,
6973,
3
],
[
6973,
8663,
4
]
]
} |
467e3cc4fcb61bf6633ce1468c7a296f6ccf7ff7 | Authorities and public bodies must show they have fulfilled this duty. Where their activities outside National Parks might have an impact inside them, the Government says they should cooperate across national park boundaries.
7.19 Where there are conflicting desired outcomes in achieving national park purposes, greater priority must be given to the conservation of the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area, even at the cost of some socio-economic benefits. This is known as the Sandford Principle and remains a key tool in managing irreconcilable conflicts in the National Park. Nevertheless, this Core Strategy aims to find ‘win-win’ solutions which are socially inclusive, address the needs of our communities, and conserve and enhance the National Park’s valued characteristics. For example, the Authority needs to plan carefully to mitigate and adapt to climate change, which means enabling development of an appropriate scale that is sustainable, accessible and inclusive, without compromising the landscape.
7.20 The National Park Authority aims to support exemplary sustainable development. For the National Park, in many cases, the Authority will be justified in requiring developers to go that bit further in order to achieve sustainable development and conserve and enhance the National Park. This could include, for example, building with local materials in the vernacular tradition, sharing telecommunications masts, buying homes for local need rather than building new, undergrounding electricity cables, working towards the gradual reduction of mineral activity, using sustainable urban drainage, conserving and enhancing the ecological interest of sites, carrying out archaeological surveys, and fully justifying the need for new development.
7.21 Development should take account of the following policy considerations:
- Mitigating and adapting to climate change (chapters 7, 8, 11 and 15);
- Delivering high quality design respecting local distinctiveness (chapters 7, 8, 9 and 11);
- Fostering access to services and facilities by locating development according to the objectives of the spatial strategy (chapters 8 and 15);
- Encouraging social integration in an inclusive environment that considers people’s diverse needs regardless of age, gender or disability (chapters 7, 8, 10, 12 and 15);
- Encouraging good health, safety and well-being (chapters 7, 8 and 10);
- Supporting appropriate economic development (chapters 8, 12 and 13);
- Championing environmental quality (chapters 7, 8, 9 and 11);
- Seeking development of an appropriate scale (all chapters);
- Addressing the local needs of the National Park’s communities (chapters 7, 8 and 12);
- Considering the needs of future generations (all chapters);
- Achieving ‘win-win’ solutions (all chapters).
| GSP1: Securing national park purposes and sustainable development | |---------------------------------------------------------------| | A. All policies must be read in combination. | | B. All development shall be consistent with the National Park’s legal purposes and duty. | | C. Where there is an irreconcilable conflict between the statutory purposes, the Sandford Principle will be applied and the conservation and enhancement of the National Park will be given priority. | D. Where national park purposes can be secured, opportunities must be taken to contribute to the sustainable development of the area.
E. In securing national park purposes major development should not take place within the Peak District National Park other than in exceptional circumstances. Major development will only be permitted following rigorous consideration of the criteria in national policy.
F. Where a proposal for major development can demonstrate a significant net benefit to the National Park, every effort to mitigate potential localised harm and compensate for any residual harm to the area’s valued characteristics would be expected to be secured.
Achieving enhancement of the National Park
7.22 To achieve enhancement of the National Park it is necessary to maintain an ongoing commitment to intensify as well as conserve the area’s valued characteristics. The spatial portrait highlights the need for enhancement, to mitigate the deterioration of the landscape and other valued characteristics. Enhancement should always be related closely to purposes and valued characteristics. Other benefits of a socio-economic nature are dealt with in policies such as those for homes and communities or for the economy. From time to time, larger, more complex opportunities for enhancement arise and these may require a site brief that can bring together enhancement and socio-economic opportunities (policies GSP2 and E1 allow for this at E and D respectively).
7.23 The National Park Authority will require a proposal justified on the basis of enhancement to demonstrate that it represents an overall benefit to the natural beauty, and wildlife and cultural heritage of the area. In many cases this must be achieved through the quality of design and sensitivity to the character and appearance of the area in support of other core policies. Occasionally the Authority may choose to accept a scheme by way of exception to some policies in order to achieve a significant overall benefit to the National Park, for example by accepting a new mineral operation in order to reduce the overall extent and impact in other areas.
7.24 It is essential that the standard of design and landscape aspects of new development conserve and enhance the valued characteristics of the National Park. The Authority’s specialist fields of knowledge in landscape, biodiversity and cultural heritage are underpinned by high quality guidance notes and appraisal documents. These will be used to ensure that new development can be achieved with subtlety and care in order to integrate successfully with the valued character and appearance of the area.
7.25 Furthermore, planning powers can provide an effective mechanism to realise other enhancements to the built and natural environment. Development decisions and other tools may allow opportunities to remove or treat undesirable features or buildings, but works must be undertaken in a sympathetic manner so as not to harm other valued characteristics which may exist on or surrounding a site.
7.26 In some cases whilst a development may by its nature create an undesirable impact on neighbouring properties, the use may still provide a valuable function to the community, e.g. an industrial or engineering use. In such cases it may be more desirable to find an alternative site, particularly where this can result in an overall enhancement to the valued characteristics of the area. Policy provides the flexibility to manage the movement of development to more appropriate locations, giving opportunities to enhance an area and achieve a better mix of uses to benefit a community. GSP2: Enhancing the National Park
A. Opportunities for enhancing the valued characteristics of the National Park will be identified and acted upon.
B. Proposals intended to enhance the National Park will need to demonstrate that they offer significant overall benefit to the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the area. They should not undermine the achievement of other Core Policies.
C. When development is permitted, a design will be sought that respects the character of the area, and where appropriate, landscaping and planting schemes will be sought that are consistent with local landscape characteristics and their setting, complementing the locality and helping to achieve biodiversity objectives.
D. Opportunities will be taken to enhance the National Park by the treatment or removal of undesirable features or buildings. Work must be undertaken in a manner which conserves the valued characteristics of the site and its surroundings.
E. Development in settlements necessary for the treatment, removal or relocation of non-conforming uses to an acceptable site, or which would enhance the valued characteristics of the National Park will be permitted. In such cases a site brief may be necessary to achieve the best mix of uses to secure the conservation and enhancement of the National Park and the most sustainable outcome for the community.
Development management principles
7.27 In order to achieve the sensitive management of new development it is necessary to establish both principles and finer criteria for judging impacts on valued characteristics. The Development Management Policies Development Plan Document will provide greater detail but this policy sets out principles that need to be taken into account in all cases.
GSP3: Development management principles
All development must conform to the following principles:
Development must respect, conserve and enhance all valued characteristics of the site and buildings that are subject to the development proposal. Particular attention will be paid to:
A. impact on the character and setting of buildings B. scale of development appropriate to the character and appearance of the National Park C. siting, landscaping and building materials D. design in accordance with the National Park Authority Design Guide E. form and intensity of proposed use or activity F. impact on living conditions of communities G. impact on access and traffic levels H. use of sustainable modes of transport I. use of sustainable building techniques J. ground conditions including any land instability from former mining, quarrying or industrial uses K. adapting to and mitigating the impact of climate change, particularly in respect of carbon emissions, energy and water demand
Securing planning benefits
7.28 National policy recognises that some development may adversely affect some people, and that local planning authorities can use planning conditions or obligations to ameliorate this. Negotiated benefits must be clearly related to the development, and necessary to make it acceptable in planning terms.
7.29 Planning consents commonly make use of conditions and legal agreements about specific matters related to development to provide a wider benefit. In the National Park it would be appropriate to include requirements that aid the implementation of national park purposes, for example to make provision for landscaping, or to develop in such a way that species such as bats are able to make use of the new structure. In pursuing national park purposes it would also be appropriate to use conditions/legal agreements to ensure sustainable development e.g. through design and/or measures to improve energy conservation or renewable energy generation.
7.30 In some instances it may be appropriate to agree benefit for off-site investment that is directly related to national park purposes (such as habitat, cultural heritage and landscape restoration or enhancement), or for specific local community needs (such as affordable housing or a new village hall). This is necessary where benefits are not best accommodated on the site and are most likely to be achievable in the occasional larger-scale scheme allowed in order to secure conservation and enhancement.
7.31 The low rate of development in the National Park is unlikely to result in strategically significant sums of money, but there are general democratic reasons in each County and District why development within the National Park should contribute towards community infrastructure in the same way that development outside will be expected to. This might best and most fairly be dealt with by reflecting any delivery priorities that are advocated by the appropriate District and County Councils, based on consideration of relevant service infrastructure needs in that part of the National Park. They could be set out in a Charging Schedule drawn up by the National Park Authority. This could also describe how the Authority might exempt particular developments such as social housing.
GSP4: Planning conditions and legal agreements
A. To aid the achievement of its spatial outcomes, the National Park Authority will consider the contribution that a development can make directly and/or to its setting, including, where consistent with government guidance, using planning conditions and planning obligations.
B. The National Park Authority's use of broader mechanisms will pay close regard to the advice of County and District Councils and other relevant service and infrastructure providers in each part of the National Park.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1650-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 4,
"total-input-tokens": 4276,
"total-output-tokens": 2484,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3307,
1
],
[
3307,
6935,
2
],
[
6935,
9462,
3
],
[
9462,
12516,
4
]
]
} |
4f9dbcc256382ee3c2c83ac7907c1154b86fda9a | Dear Mr Price
Request for a Screening Direction Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017. The laying of geotextile matting and log rafts at Land at Mickleden Edge, Midhope Moor, Bradfield.
I refer to your client's request dated 26 November 2018, made under 6(10) of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017(S.I. 2017/571) ("the 2017 Regulations") for the Secretary of State's screening direction the matter of whether or not the above development is 'EIA development' within the meaning of the 2017 Regulations.
The above development falls within the description at paragraph 10 Infrastructure of Schedule 2 to the 2017 Regulations and is located in a sensitive area namely the Peak District National Park, within an area designated as a SSSI, SAC & SPA. Therefore, the Secretary of State considers the proposal to be 'Schedule 2 development' within the meaning of the 2017 Regulations.
However, having taken into account the selection criteria in Schedule 3 to the 2017 Regulations the Secretary of State does not consider that the proposal is likely to have significant effects on the environment, see the attached written statement which gives the reasons for direction as required by 5(6) of the EIA Regulations.
Accordingly, in exercise of the powers conferred on him by regulation 7(5) of the 2017 Regulations the Secretary of State hereby directs that the proposed development described in your client's request and the documents submitted with it, is not 'EIA development' within the meaning of the 2017 Regulations.
Any permitted development rights which your client’s proposal may enjoy under the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) Order 2015 (SI 596) as amended are therefore unaffected. You will bear in mind that the Secretary of State's opinion on the likelihood of the development having significant environmental effects is reached only for the purposes of this direction.
I am sending a copy of this letter and the written statement to Jane Newman of the Peak District National Park Authority.
Yours sincerely
Maria Bowen Planning Officer (With the authority of the Secretary of State) Town & Country Planning (EIA) Regulations 2017 Secretary of State Screening Direction – Written Statement
| Application name: | Land at Mickleden Edge | |-------------------|-------------------------| | SoS case reference: | PCU/EIA/M9496/3217242 | | Schedule and category of development: | Schedule 2, 10 Infrastructure, (f) roads. |
**Full statement of reasons as required by 5(5)(a) of the 2017 EIA Regulations including conclusions on likeliness of significant environmental effects.**
The Secretary of State has considered whether the above proposal is likely to have significant environmental effects. He has undertaken this screening taking into account the criteria set out in Schedule 3 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017.
The development comprises a stretch of geotextile matting (670 m in length and 2m width) which has been laid along a length of pre-existing track situated at Mickleden Edge, Midhope Moor, within the Peak District National Park. Additionally, a number of wooden poles which are strapped together to form log ‘rafts’ have been laid along two short stretches of the track extending to approximately 15-20m in length each.
The site lies within the Peak District National Park, the Dark Peak Site of Special Scientific Interest, a Special Area of Conservation, and a Special Protection Area. Therefore, the site is located in a ‘sensitive area’ as defined by the 2017 EIA regulations.
As this is a retrospective screening as construction has already taken place, the Secretary of State, in his role in assessing the environmental impact of a development, cannot comment on the effects during construction. Therefore, matters relating to the construction method, and the impact are not relevant in this case and are not covered by this screening opinion.
The Secretary of State has also consulted Historic England, the Environment Agency and Natural England with regard to potential significant effects from this project on heritage and ecological/landscape designations and features in the vicinity.
Historic England state that it ‘does not consider the case is likely to have a significant impact on designated heritage assets’. The Environment Agency state that ‘this type/location of development is not within its remit so therefore has no comments to make’.
Natural England (NE) although recognising the sensitive location of the development site, state that it does not have a role in commenting on whether a development is a type covered by Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning Act (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2017’. NE were asked by the Secretary of State to specifically comment on how these works fitted with the aims and objectives of the Midhope Moors Management Plan (MMMP). The MMMP is an agreement between the land owner and NE which covers the site area and the Dark Peak SSSI. The management plan details the main management of the moorland fulfilling land manager obligations under the HLS agreement and the SSSI legislation. The plan provides consent for moorland management. In relation to these specific works NE state that they were agreed and confirm they are in accordance with the Midhope Moors Management Plan aims and objectives.
The council considers this development is EIA development and it falls within Schedule 2 (10 Infrastructure, (f) construction of roads). It believes that the development has resulted in a loss of moorland habitat, and it is likely that compaction and hydrological damage has occurred through the construction method used (levelling the route with a tracked vehicle and the inversion technique that was carried out along 45m of the route. It states the surfacing may lead to an increased use of this route in preference to other informal tracks in the area, which would exacerbate this problem. As previously stated, the Secretary of State cannot comment on the retrospective element of the development.
The Secretary of State has concluded that any significant visual and landscape effects on the Peak District National Park, the SSSI, SAC or SPA would be limited and temporary. He recognises that initially the geotextile matting will be visible. However, the matting allows grass, heather and other vegetation to grow up through the matting. Therefore, the visual impact of this project in this greenfield location would reduce over time. The ‘log raft’ will also have an initial negative visual impact. However, this impact is not considered to be significant in EIA terms and, over time, due to the natural weathering of the logs, this visual impact will also reduce.
Planning Practice Guidance (Mar 2014) requires the Secretary of State to also consider the potential cumulative impacts of a proposal. It states that each application should be considered on its own merits. However, there are no issues relating to the cumulative impact of the development as there is no other similar approved or existing development in the vicinity of the site.
In relation to impacts on the ecological and historic environment the Secretary of State has carefully assessed all of the evidence before him and has had due regard to the views of statutory consultees. He notes they do not have any comments or concerns in respect of this development. He also notes that the site covers a relatively small area of land, which is the site of a pre-existing track, and that although visual impacts will initially be evident, these are not considered to be significant, even at their highest level, and that they will reduce over time due to the nature and characteristics of the materials used.
The Secretary of State concludes that although there would be an initial visual impact, this impact is not deemed significant and will be temporary. After carefully assessing all of the evidence before him, the Secretary of State has concluded that there are no other issues or factors in this case, in this specific location, that either in isolation, or cumulatively, indicate a likelihood of there being significant environmental effects from this proposal. **EIA is not required.**
| Is an Environmental Statement required? | No | |----------------------------------------|----|
| Name | Maria Bowen | |------------|-------------| | Date | 08/03/19 |
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/1651-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 4,
"total-input-tokens": 4276,
"total-output-tokens": 1937,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1804,
1
],
[
1804,
2211,
2
],
[
2211,
5977,
3
],
[
5977,
8533,
4
]
]
} |
418e346957cc0731303e947d8de04657d9991160 | Education and Training National Success Rates Tables for the Academic Year 2011/12
Guidance Notes
1. What is new in the 2011/12 Tables?
The changes to the Education & Training National Success Rate Tables from 2010/11 are:
a) Data Changes
Success rates data for 2011/12 have been added to the tables, and data for 2008/09 has been removed.
b) Presentational Changes
i) The names of the provider groups have been changed to use the wording used in the Statistical First Release. The column name has been changed to ‘Institution Type’.
ii) Except on the Institution worksheets the first three columns on all worksheets have been changed to be Institution Type, Year and Age.
iii) In the ‘NSRT Overall’ spreadsheet the ‘Headline Age Level - Short’ worksheets, showing the breakdown of short qualifications, have been removed, and the short qualification breakdown has been included in the ‘Age Length Level’ worksheets.
c) Removal of Columns
A number of columns have been removed from the tables as the data in them is either shown elsewhere or is little used.
i) ‘Headline Age Level SR’ worksheet in the ‘NSRT Overall’ spreadsheet.
Columns ‘A Level’, ‘A2 Level’, ‘AS Level’, ‘BTEC/OCR’, IB, GCSE, NVQ and OTHER have been removed. The values in these columns are present on the ‘Qualification Type SR’ worksheet.
ii) ‘A, AS Levels, GCSEs, IBs’, BTEC OCR’ and ‘NVQ’ worksheets in the ‘NSRT A AS NVQ BTEC IB GCSE’ spreadsheet.
Columns ‘Starts Including Transfers’, ‘No. of Transfers Out’, ‘No. of Continuing’, ‘No. of Completers’, ‘No. of Retained (inc Continuing)’, ‘No. of Achievers’, ‘Known Outcome’, ‘No. of Exams Taken Awaiting Result’, ‘No. of completed aims where exam result is not yet known’ have been removed.
iii) All worksheets in the ‘NSRT Other Qualifications’ spreadsheet. Columns ‘Starts Including Transfers’, ‘No. of Transfers Out’, ‘No. of Completers’, ‘No. of Retained (inc Continuing)’, ‘No. of Achievers’, ‘Known Outcome’, ‘No. of Exams Taken Awaiting Result’, ‘No. of completed aims where exam result is not yet known’ have been removed.
d) Display of Gender, Ethnicity and Learning Difficulty / Disability in the ‘NSRT Overall’ spreadsheet
The information for Gender, Ethnicity and Learning Difficulty / Disability has been split into individual worksheets, to match the method of presentation on the Institutions worksheets.
e) Removal of Duration and Replacement by Length
Where worksheets contained both Duration and Length, the Duration column has been removed and additional aggregations have been added to the Length field. Where worksheets only contained Duration this has been replaced by Length.
f) Suppression Rules
The data suppression rules have been changed.
- Cohorts with fewer than 5 leavers are not output.
- Cohorts where the number of leavers is 5 or more but less than 30 have the number of leavers replaced with a dash (-).
On the percentiles worksheets:
- If there are 20 or more providers the 10th, 25th, median (50th), 75th and 90th percentiles are output.
- If there are between 11 and 19 providers only the median (50th) percentile is output.
- If there are 10 or fewer providers no percentiles are output.
2. The Purpose of the Education and Training National Success Rates Tables
The National Success Rates Tables for Education and Training provision set out levels of success, retention and achievement in further education (FE) providers in England for the period 2009/10 to 2011/12. The Data Service publishes National Success Rates Tables annually. This release of the Education and Training National Success Rates Tables updates the 2008/09 to 2010/11 Education and Training tables published in August 2012. It is consistent with the Classroom Based Learning Qualification Success Rates reports for 2011/12 published to individual providers in January 2012 and expands upon the information made available in the FE Data Library.
The publication of the Education and Training National Success Rates Tables supports providers in raising the standard of their delivery. The Tables allow providers to assess their performance, and assists the planning of action programmes to improve the success, retention and achievement rates of their learners.
The term National Success Rates Tables, rather than 'Benchmarking Data', is used throughout this guidance. National Success Rates Tables is used to denote a context and reference point for comparison, not a standard of best practice. 3) Contents of the Education and Training National Success Rates Tables
The Data Service’s approach to publishing the Education and Training National Success Rates Tables is to publish a manageable amount of information, drawing on existing statistical measures.
The Education and Training National Success Rates Tables data have been derived from providers’ Individualised Learner Record (ILR) returns and furnish a range of national and provider statistics for success, retention and achievement. Information on the qualification success rates methodology is available at the Success Rates pages of the Data Service website.
Since the data is calculated at qualification level, learners studying more than one qualification will appear once for each qualification.
4. Format of the Education and Training National Success Rates Tables
The Education and Training National Success Rate Tables are published as six zip files. Each zip file holds a Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet, which contains a number of worksheets. The contents of each Excel spreadsheet are listed below.
a) Overall Report
The overall report contains worksheets that show headline national success, achievement and retention rates, and national success, achievement and retention rates by qualification level, qualification type, gender, learner difficulty / disability, ethnicity, the learner’s local authority (district) (based on the learner’s home postcode) and the delivery local authority (district) (based on the institution's delivery location postcode).
The overall report also contains worksheets that show percentile information for the headline national success, achievement and retention rates, and for qualification level, qualification type, ethnicity, gender and learner difficulty / disability.
b) Sector Subject Area Report
The sector subject area report contains worksheets that show the national success, achievement and retention rates for qualification type, qualification level and length by sector subject area tier 1.
c) Institution Report
The institution report contains worksheets that show the success, achievement and retention rates for institutions by qualification level, gender, ethnicity, learner difficulty / disability, sector subject area tier 1 and delivery local authority (district).
d) Qualification Type Reports
The qualification type reports contain worksheets that show the national success, achievement and retention rate of individual qualifications by length. For each qualification the qualification code, qualification type, qualification level, qualification title and sector subject area tier 1 are shown. e) Excluded Qualifications Report
Due to the data exclusion rules described in section 6 the full coverage of qualifications delivered is not available in the qualification type spreadsheets. The excluded rows are included in the excluded qualification worksheet to allow the full scope of qualification delivery to be seen.
5. Data Exclusions
The same types of aims are excluded from the Education and Training National Success Rates Tables as are excluded from the Classroom Based Learning Qualification Success Rates reports sent to individual providers. The main exclusions are Key Skills, Functional Skills and Offender Learning and Skills Service (OLASS) provision. The full list of exclusions is described in the Classroom Based Learning business rules, which are available from the Data Service website.
6. Exclusion of Small Cohorts, Data Suppression and Rounding
On all worksheets cohorts with fewer than 5 starts are not shown. Cohorts with between 5 and 29 starts have had the starts value replaced with a dash (-). If the number of starts is 5 or more, but the number of completers is less than 5 the Achievement Rate has been replaced with a dash (-). All numbers have been rounded to the nearest 10. This prevents the potential identification of individual learners or individual learners' success.
Due to data quality issues some figures cannot be shown and have been replaced by an asterisk (\*).
On the percentiles worksheets:
- If there are 20 or more providers the 10th, 25th, median (50th), 75th and 90th percentiles are output.
- If there are between 11 and 19 providers only the median (50th) percentile is output
- If there are 10 or fewer providers no percentiles are output
Where individual qualification success rates are reported, if a qualification is only delivered at a single institution, the qualification is not included in the report. Any rows that are excluded are listed in the “Excluded Qualifications” report, together with the reason why they were excluded.
Because of the exclusion of rows on the qualification worksheets the total of the starters for the individual institution types may be less than the number of starters for the ‘All Institution Type’ row. The excluded institution type rows are show in the Excluded Qualifications spreadsheet, together with the reason for exclusion.
7. Location of the Tables
The data for 2011/12 can be accessed from the Success Rates pages of the Data Service website. 8) Selecting Data on the National Success Rates Tables
The success, achievement and retention rate data is presented as a series of rows in the Excel worksheets. Each row shows the success, achievement and retention rate of a specific cohort of learners. Summary information is shown at many levels, e.g. all ages, all lengths, all institution types. The worksheets contain column filters that are used to select the information required.
The screenshot below shows an example of how the data will appear in the Age, Length and Level success rate worksheet. This illustrates different levels of aggregation.
The column filters are used to select the required level of information. The screen shot below shows the effect of using the filters to select success rate data broken down by age for all lengths and all qualification levels for 2009/10. 9) Worksheet Contents
Information about selected columns in the worksheets is shown below.
a) Institution Type
Each provider is classified into one of 6 institution types. The institution types reported on are:
- General FE and Tertiary College
- Other Public Funded
- Private Sector Public Funded
- Schools
- Sixth Form College
- Specialist College
The Specialist College category include Agriculture & Horticulture colleges and Art, Design & Performing Arts colleges
An ‘All Institution Type’ category is also available on some of the worksheets.
b) Age
The age group of a cohort of learners is calculated from their age as at 31 August in the year they started their learning aim. Learners of unknown age are included in the age group 19 and over. Learners under 16 years are included in the 16-18 age group. All tables show the National Success Rates Tables data divided into three age groups: ‘16-18’, ‘19 and over’, and ‘All Ages’.
c) Length
Each aim is classified into one of three lengths
- Long The expected length is equal to or greater than 168 days (24 weeks)
- Short The expected length is greater than 34 days and less than 168 days (between 5 to 24 weeks)
- Very Short The expected length is less than or equal to 34 days (less than 5 weeks)
An ‘All Short’ category and an ‘All Length’ category are also available
d) Qualification Level
Learning Aims are grouped according to their qualification level recorded in the Data Service’s Learning Aims Reference Application. The levels are:
- level 1- includes qualifications at level 1 and level 'E' (entry level), such as NVQs and other foundation or pre-foundation qualifications
- level 2 - includes level 2 NVQs, intermediate NVQs and precursors (BTEC first certificate or first diploma, City and Guilds Diploma of Vocational Education at intermediate level), GCSEs and other intermediate level qualifications • level 3 - includes level 3 NVQs, advanced NVQs and precursors (BTEC national certificate or national diploma, City and Guilds Diploma of Vocational Education at national level), advanced VCEs, GCE A, A2 and AS levels and other advanced level qualifications • level H - all level 4 and 5 qualifications including HNCs and HNDs • Unknown - Qualifications with unknown or unspecified level
An ‘All Levels’ category is also available
e) Qualification Types
Learning Aims are grouped according to their qualification type. The types are:
• A Level • A2 Level • AS Level • BTEC / OCR • GCSE • International Baccalaureate • NVQ • Other
An ‘All Types’ category is also available
f) Qualification Codes
The qualification codes shown in the qualification level data tables are obtained from Learning Aim Reference Application (LARA) hierarchy file, which can be found on the Data Service website. If a qualification has a Map Code in the LARA hierarchy file this is used on the report, otherwise the Learning Aim Reference is used
g) Number of Starters (Excluding Transfers)
The number of ‘Starters Excluding Transfers’ is the number of enrolments on learning aims where the learner was expecting to complete the aims in that academic year. Details to note on the definition include:
i) The number of starts excludes any learner who transferred onto another learning aim at the same institution. The learning aim the learner transfers onto will be included as a start on the new aim.
ii) Learners who start on a learning aim expected to last at least 168 days and withdraw within 42 days of starting, qualify for an SLN payment yet have received no payment, are considered as not funded and are excluded from the count of starters.
iii) Each learning aim a learner is enrolled on is shown as a separate ‘start’.
iv) A cohort of learners on a two year programme who began their studies in October 2009 would appear in the results for 2010/11 as this is the academic year in which they expected to complete their learning aim, even if they withdrew before August 2010. h) Success Rates
Success rates are calculated as the number of learning aims achieved divided by the number of starters, excluding internal transfers within a provider. It can also be derived by multiplying achievement rate by retention rate.
i) Retention Rate
The retention rate is the number of learning aims completed, divided by the number of learners who started the aim, excluding internal transfers within a provider. For programmes of study of two years or more, retention is calculated across the whole programme, i.e. from the start to the end of the aim.
j) Achievement Rate
The achievement rate is the number of learning aims fully achieved divided by the number of completed aims. This denominator includes those completers recorded with unknown outcomes in the ILR, for example outcome code 4 ‘exam taken but result not known’ or outcome code 5 ‘learning activities are complete but exam has not yet been taken’. Partial achievements are not included as achievements.
10. Percentiles
Percentiles for success, retention and achievement rates enable institutions to compare their results against the range for the sector or particular groups of institutions.
One way of interpreting percentiles is:
- providers with a success, retention and achievement rate equal to or greater than the 90th percentile are in the top 10% of providers
- providers with a success, retention and achievement rate equal to or greater than the 75th percentile are in the top 25% of providers
- providers with a success, retention and achievement rate equal to or greater than the 50th percentile are in the top 50% of providers
- providers with a success, retention and achievement rate less than or equal to the 25th percentile are in the bottom 25% of providers
- providers with a success, retention and achievement rate less than or equal to the 10th percentile are in the bottom 10% of providers
This is illustrated by the following table. A provider with a success rate of 45% would be in the bottom 10% of providers, whereas a provider with a success rate of 82% would be in the top 10% of providers.
| Percentile Position | Overall Success Rate % | |---------------------|------------------------| | 10 | 46.5 | | 25 | 59.4 | | 50 | 68.6 | | 75 | 74.5 | | 90 | 81.3 | An alternative way of looking at this for provider types is that:
- the top 10% of providers in a provider type category have a success, retention or achievement rate equal to or greater than the 90th percentile
- the top 25% of providers in a provider type category have a success, retention or achievement rate equal to or greater than the 75th percentile
- the top 50% of providers in a provider type category have a success, retention or achievement rate equal to or greater than the 50th percentile
- the bottom 25% of providers in a provider type category have a success, retention or achievement rate less than or equal to the 25th percentile
- the bottom 10% of providers in a provider type category have a success, retention or achievement rate less than or equal to the 10th percentile
Percentiles are calculated at provider level in order to provide information on variation between providers. This is different from the success, retention and achievement rates, which are calculated as the average rate for all the relevant enrolments, weighting each enrolment equally.
Percentiles weight each provider equally. This means that learners in smaller providers have a greater bearing on results than those from larger providers. The results for small groupings, such as learning aims being studied by adults in sixth forms, will be affected by this weighting more than others.
Both the mean success, retention and achievement rates and the percentiles are valid and useful measures, depending on whether the overall performance of the sector is of interest (mean success, retention and achievement rates) or the variability between providers is the focus (percentiles). 11) Further Information and Help
If you would like any more information about the Education and Training National Success Rates Tables please contact our Service Desk on 0870 267 0001 or email servicedesk@thedataservice.org.uk.
Please be aware that the Data Service is responsible for producing National Success Rate Tables in accordance with the Classroom Based Provision Qualifications Success Rates business rules approved by the Skills Funding Agency. The business rules and technical specification are available at the Success Rate pages of the Data Service website.
Providers will find answers to most of their queries regarding the Education & Training National Success Rates Tables in this guidance document or in the frequently asked questions at the National Success Rates Tables page on the Data Service website. It is strongly recommended that providers refer to these sources before contacting the Data Service.
If providers need further help, the Data Service will be pleased to receive queries regarding the Education & Training National Success Rates tables. However, when logging a query with the Data Service please provide a detailed explanation of the query being raised.
Published by: The Data Service Version: 1 Date: 25 April 2013
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2588-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 10,
"total-input-tokens": 18422,
"total-output-tokens": 4663,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1799,
1
],
[
1799,
4458,
2
],
[
4458,
7096,
3
],
[
7096,
9558,
4
],
[
9558,
10407,
5
],
[
10407,
12297,
6
],
[
12297,
14369,
7
],
[
14369,
16821,
8
],
[
16821,
18504,
9
],
[
18504,
19762,
10
]
]
} |
ca39c884138ccbb572feb37ea644c7f55cec4a8c | Performance Management 2013/14: March 2014
Sustainable Development Committee
Director of Social and Community Services Business Performance Community Education and Training
Business Plan Progress
• All Business Plan actions have been achieved. • 490 young people participated in Accredited Youth Awards. • The LEADER funded Youth Engagement Project completed. • 151 young people supported on National Training Programmes. • 65 young people supported through the Youth Employment Scotland Fund. • 40 employees have been, or are being, supported in SVQs in Health and Social Care. Business Performance Community Education and Training
Business Plan Progress
- High level of participation in community learning with 69 classes taking place and 561 learners attending, and a high demand for literacies and ‘English for Speakers of Other Languages’ (ESOL) support, with 93 learners accessing Adult Literacy and Numeracy provision and 47 accessing ESOL support.
- Redesign of HILLS programme completed.
- There were no formal complaints in relation to this service in March 2014. Heritage
- All Business Plan actions achieved, with the exception of the Historic Environment Strategy which has been superseded by a wider brief for the development of Archaeology (April 2014 Committee series).
- Lews Castle Museum and Archive content delivery: 90% of all text for Graphics Schedule written in both Gaelic and English and all images are now identified for use in galleries. Heritage (continued):
- **HLF Lews Castle Museum and Archive Project** working alongside the Lews Castle Grounds Project for consistency and synergies.
- **The ERDF Tasglann nan Eilean Siar** project which established the archive service ceased on 30 November 2013. The new post of Archivist is now part of the Heritage Team, with funding until March 2015.
- **The Udal Archaeology Project** was allocated 2 grants from Historic Scotland for the Udal post excavation analysis and the second for a post ex management assistant to be based in Uist. Heritage (continued):
- **Udal Archaeology (continued):** A workshop was held on 31 January 2014 at the Scottish Parliament building hosted by Alasdair Allan MSP to discuss further collaborative research between ecology, archaeology and climatology, and the proposed Archaeological and Environmental Research Centre in North Uist. This workshop was supported by HIE. A second workshop was organised in Uist in April 2014.
- There were no formal complaints in relation to this service in March 2014. Business Performance Cultural and Information Services (Libraries and Heritage)
Libraries
• A Bookbug Outreach Officer (Gaelic) has been appointed.
• Live Literature funding has been secured for the Faclan Sparks Festival and for the Summer Reading Challenge events 2014.
• Funding has been received from the Public Library Improvement Fund (PLIF) for staff training in new technologies.
• There were no formal complaints in relation to this service in March 2014. Business Performance Sport and Health
Business Plan Progress
Sport and Health
• 4/5 Business Plan actions on target. • Customer satisfaction work will continue in 2014/15. • Increase of 30,000 public attendances. • 7.1% increase in Slainte Mhath memberships. • Sports hub capital and revenue projects. • There were no formal complaints in relation to this service in March 2014.
# Development Department: Financial Performance
| Service | Total Budget £k | Actual Spend £k | Over/(under) spend £k | |-------------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------------| | Economic Development | 2,425 | 1,991 | (434) | | Energy Unit | 143 | 171 | 28 | | Planning Development | 321 | 269 | (52) | | **Total Development Department** | **2,889** | **2,431** | **(458)** |
# Social and Community Services Department: Financial Performance
| Service | Total Budget £k | Actual Spend £k | Over/(under) spend £k | |----------------------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------------| | Management & Administration | 44 | 27 | (17) | | Community Education & Learning | 1,214 | 1,189 | (25) | | Sport and Health Services | 1,217 | 1,144 | (73) | | Other Leisure Services | 203 | 194 | (9) | | Cultural & Information Services | 1,141 | 1,112 | (29) | | **Total** | **3,819** | **3,666** | **(153)** | | Trading Operation: Library Café | - | 13 | 13 | | IAS 19 adjustment | - | 7 | 7 | | Deficit prior to IAS 19 adjustment | - | 6 | 6 |
## Sustainable Development Committee: Overall Financial Performance
| Service | Total Budget £k | Actual Spend £k | Over/(under) spend £k | |----------------------------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------------| | Development | 2,889 | 2,431 | (458) | | Social and Community Services | 3,819 | 3,666 | (153) | | Social and Community Services Trading Operations | - | 13 | 13 | | **Total Sustainable Development Committee** | **6,708** | **6,110** | **(598)** |
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2589-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 11,
"total-input-tokens": 14459,
"total-output-tokens": 1763,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
121,
1
],
[
121,
583,
2
],
[
583,
1082,
3
],
[
1082,
1476,
4
],
[
1476,
2026,
5
],
[
2026,
2527,
6
],
[
2527,
2997,
7
],
[
2997,
3379,
8
],
[
3379,
3996,
9
],
[
3996,
5196,
10
],
[
5196,
5922,
11
]
]
} |
11b925cfbfe2d232701b148e863cc763c55e02e7 | Making Tax Digital (MTD)-VAT End-to-End (E2E) Customer Journeys v5.0
Rob Speksnijder Senior Digital Service Manager for MTD
\*Please do not issue externally without permission from Rob Speksnijder \*This document will be updated monthly. Please note that some screenshots may become outdated between versions of this document as design work continues Contents
• Introduction • Vision • High level design • Customer journeys • Timetable for lifting signup restrictions • Journeys • Customer support model Vision
Making Tax Digital (MTD) is a key part of the government’s plans to make it easier for businesses to get their tax right first time and keep on top of their tax affairs.
Every business now has their own digital tax account, and the functionality is being regularly expanded and improved. HMRC’s ambition is to become one of the most digitally advanced tax administrations in the world, modernising the tax system to make it more effective, more efficient, and easier for customers to comply with their tax obligations.
Keeping records digitally and providing updates to HMRC direct from the software will reduce the amount of avoidable errors businesses currently make (and the cost, uncertainty and worry they face when HMRC is forced to intervene to put things right). This streamlined digital experience will integrate tax into day-to-day business record-keeping, giving businesses confidence that they have got it right and provide them with a view of their tax position in-year.
Timetable
MTD for VAT will be mandatory for businesses whose taxable turnover is above the VAT registration threshold (currently £85,000) from 1 April 2019. It will remain voluntary for VAT registered businesses below the VAT threshold until 2020 in any event. Vision
Foundations
- Better use of information - customers should not have to give HMRC information that it already has, or that it is able to get from elsewhere (for instance from employers, banks, building societies and other government departments). Digital tax accounts for all, and open APIs, will mean that customers can use their chosen software to check the information that HMRC holds about them at any time to ensure that it is complete and correct; HMRC will use this information to tailor the service it provides for customers.
- Tax in real time - Our customers should not have to wait long periods know how much tax they may have to pay. HMRC will collect and process information affecting tax as close to real time as possible to:
- help prevent errors
- stop tax due or repayments owed building up.
- Interacting digitally with customers - Our customers (and their agents) will be able to interact with HMRC digitally and at a time to suit them. Their digital accounts will present them with an increasingly personalised picture of their tax affairs, with prompts, advice and support through webchat and secure messaging. Digital record keeping software will be linked directly to HMRC systems, allowing customers to send and receive information directly from their software, with nudges and prompts built-in to help them get their tax right. High level design
• 98% of current VAT returns are submitted digitally (either directly by the business or by their agent), the vast majority using HMRC’s online portal.
• MTD requires businesses to record business transactions digitally, and in real time (or as close as possible). This will be underpinned by a requirement for subscribed businesses to send a summary of those records (a VAT Return) that will be generated and sent to HMRC using software or an app. Most businesses submit a VAT return on a quarterly basis, but some businesses currently file VAT Returns on a monthly or annual basis and this will continue under MTD.
• The digital record must include the following detail of each transaction: • amount • date • category
There is no obligation to make and store images of invoices and receipts digitally.
Example customer software journeys https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vat-notice-70022-making-tax-digital-for-vat/vat-notice-70022-making-tax-digital-for-vat
• MTD-compatible software will use the VAT (MTD) API to supply the VAT Return data to HMRC. HMRC doesn’t plan to produce its own digital tools and will not endorse any such products produced by anyone else. But we will work closely with and support you to design and develop digital tools that will enable HMRC’s customers to comply quickly, easily and securely with their obligations to account for tax digitally. Supporting this key functionality are a range of additional service elements, including Registration, Subscription, Authorisation and Payments. You can find more details on how these align in The Customer Journey section. Customer journeys
MTD-VAT E2E customer journeys (focusing mainly on Controlled Go-Live journeys) Introduction
• This document is primarily to help software vendors/designers understand how their software will interact with HMRC systems and what it will need to do. • Additionally, it covers elements of the service delivered by HMRC to show how the E2E service works in totality. • Product owners and business analysts can also use this document to further their understanding of MTD. Business E2E journey roadmap
01. Create an Agent services account
02. Link existing clients to your account
03. Agent services get authority from new clients (UI)
04. Customer/agent signs up to MTD
05. Customer/agent links software to HMRC via OAuth
06. Customer/agent retrieves obligations in software
07. Customer/agent submits VAT Return with declaration in software
08. Customer/agent amends previously submitted data (BAU Process)
09. Customer sets up, views, cancel, amends or makes a payment by Direct Debit
10. Customer makes a payment (other types)
11. Customer receives a repayment
12. Customer/agent notifies change of circumstances
13. Customer can view previous returns in BTA
14. Customer can view when their next return is due in BTA
15. Customer can view when their next payment is due in BTA
16. Appeals process (BAU Process)
17. Agent services VAT client led Deauthorisation
18. GOV.UK guidance available
19. Subscription service available for businesses and agents
20. Choose software GOV.UK page available
21. Obligation Reminders
22. Voluntary Supplementary Data
23. Request a VAT Refund
24. Voluntary Payments
25. Repayment Tracker
26. Payment Reminders
27. View and Change to non-MTD and former MTD customers
28. Customer/agent can see interest and penalties in BTA
29. Voluntary MTD Customer/agent asks to leave MTDB
30. Agent led Deauthorisation
31. Agent leaves Agent Services
32. Update Agency designatory details
Agent E2E journey roadmap
01. Create Agent services account and link VAT clients
02. Authorise (Agent/Client Relationship)
03. Agent subscribes client to VAT
04. Sign up a client to report their VAT through software
05. Choose software, set up software and enter data
06. Receive obligations and submit VAT Return
07. Amend VAT Return
08. Payments and repayments
09. Voluntary MTD customer asks to leave MTDB
10. Break agent/client link
11. View future obligations and previous Returns in BTA
12. Change of agent details
13. Change of circumstances
14. Penalties and interest
15. Appeals process
16. Voluntary MTD customer asks to leave MTDB
17. Agent services VAT client led Deauthorisation
18. GOV.UK guidance available
19. Subscription service available for businesses and agents
20. Choose software GOV.UK page available
21. Obligation Reminders
22. Voluntary Supplementary Data
23. Request a VAT Refund
24. Voluntary Payments
25. Repayment Tracker
26. Payment Reminders
27. View and Change to non-MTD and former MTD customers
28. Customer/agent can see interest and penalties in BTA
29. Voluntary MTD Customer/agent asks to leave MTDB
30. Agent led Deauthorisation
31. Agent leaves Agent Services
32. Update Agency designatory details VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
1 - Create an Agent services account An agent must create an Agent services account and connect it to their accounting software. The creation of the account is a one-off process that an agent firm must do to enable its staff to access Making Tax Digital through this one account and act for their clients.
The user journey is a web screen journey, accessible from accounting software or from GOV.UK. The user will:
- create a new Government Gateway (GGW) ID which will be the firm’s new GGW ID and password. **This will become an agent firm’s user ID and password that will be used to access all new HMRC services via accounting software**
- give information about the agent firm, which is held by HMRC
- receive an agent reference number, which is the number that all existing and new clients are assigned VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
1. Create an Agent services account
Start
User
Motivation
Goal
Software
IT Guru
I want to connect our software to MTDfB APIs
YourFirm Accountants
Professional forum
Generalist
I want to view my client’s income tax record
Agent subscription service
GOV.UK guidance
Employee Accountant
I want to register my client’s trust VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
1. Create an Agent services account Live page [https://www.gov.uk/guidance/get-an-hmrc-agent-services-account](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/get-an-hmrc-agent-services-account)
______________________________________________________________________
**Agent services account: sign in or set up**
As a professional tax agent firm, you need an agent services account to:
- access new HMRC online services
- use software to communicate directly with HMRC
**Set up or sign in**
**Before you start**
If you do not have an agent services account, check the guidance to find out:
- what an agent services account does
- how to set up your agent services account
- how to add clients to your agent services account
- when to use your agent services account
Get help with this page. VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
1 Create an Agent services account
Sign in
Enter your Government Gateway credentials to sign in. You received these when you created your HMRC online account.
UserID
Password
Sign in
Problems signing in
Don't have a Government Gateway account Forgotten user ID Forgotten password Forgotten user ID and password Chat to an HMRC advisor online. VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
1. Create an Agent services account
What type of business are you?
- Sole trader
- Limited company
- Partnership
- Limited liability partnership (LLP)
My business type is not listed here
You can only create an agent services account if your business is a sole trader, limited company, partnership or limited liability partnership.
Finish and sign out
Continue
Get help with this page. VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
1. Create an Agent services account
Enter your business details
Your Self Assessment Unique Taxpayer Reference (UTR) Enter the last 10 digits only. For example, 12345 67890
Where to find your Self Assessment UTR You’ll find your UTR (opens in a new window or tab) on the letter HMRC sent you when you registered for Self Assessment. It’s a 10-digit number, sometimes with a letter ‘K’ on the end.
Registered business postcode This is the postcode of your registered business address
Continue
Get help with this page. VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
1. Create an Agent services account
Is this your business?
ABC Accountants 98 High Street Anytown West Sussex AA1 1AA
These are the details we hold for Unique Taxpayer Reference (UTR) 1234567890. You will be able to change these details in a moment for your agent services account.
- Yes
- No - I want to enter a different UTR
Continue VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
1. Create an Agent services account
Check your details before creating your account
These are the business details we will use for your agent services account.
Your business name will be the name shown to clients. We need your business address to check your details. We will only use your email address to contact you about your agent services account.
| Business name | ABC Accountants | Change | |---------------------|-----------------|--------| | Business address | 96 High Street | Change | | | Anytown | | | | West Sussex | | | | AA1AA | | | Business email address | email@company.com | Change |
By setting up this account, you confirm that, to the best of your knowledge, the details you provided are correct.
Confirm details and create account VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
1. Create an Agent services account
You need a new Government Gateway agent account
You cannot use your current Government Gateway account to create an agent services account.
You will need to create a new Government Gateway agent account. You can do this now.
Create a Government Gateway account VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
1. Create an Agent services account
You need a new Government Gateway agent account
You cannot use your current Government Gateway account to create an agent services account.
You will need to create a new Government Gateway agent account. You can do this now.
Create a Government Gateway account VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
1. Create an Agent services account
Agent services account created Your account reference number XARN-123-4567
What you can do next Make a note of your account reference number XARN-123-4567. You will need this if you are not able to access your agent services account.
Check the guidance to find out how to:
- sign in to your agent services account
- use new HMRC services on behalf of your clients
Go to your agent services account
Get help with this page. VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
1. Create an Agent services account VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
2 - Link existing clients to your account VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
2 Link existing clients to your account
After an agent creates an agent service account, they link their existing VAT clients to the account. When a client subscribes to MTD, the agent can.
- view the client's data
- submit updates to HMRC
The agent’s user journey linking their existing VAT clients to the agent services account is via web screens. The agent will sign in with each GGW ID that is currently used to access HMRC online services. If an agent currently has ten GGW ID’s they must do this ten times.
HMRC encourage vendors to ensure their agent customers are aware of the service and give links to more information. VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
2 Link existing clients to your account VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
2 Link existing clients to your account
Sign in Enter your Government Gateway credentials to sign in. You received these when you created your HMRC online account.
User ID
Password
Sign in
Problems signing in Don’t have a Government Gateway account Forgotten user ID Forgotten password Forgotten user ID and password VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
2 Link existing clients to your account
Account linked Your Government Gateway account is now linked to your agent services account
What you can do next Your agent services account can now access your current client relationships linked to this Government Gateway account.
So if your clients are signed up to report their income and expenses, or their VAT returns, through software, you can now:
- use software to access information about these clients.
- act on your client’s behalf for these services without having to ask for their authorisation again.
You will still need to use your software or Government Gateway accounts to manage your client lists.
If you use more than one Government Gateway account You will need to repeat this process for each Government Gateway account your business uses.
Sign in using a different Government Gateway account to start linking it to your agent services account.
Sign in to link another account Finish and sign out VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
3 - Agent services get authority from new clients (UI) After a firm has created a new Agent services account, they must get authority from each new client they want to represent for MTD. This works by allowing an agent to send a digital request to their client. The client can accept or reject the request digitally.
To add a client:
1. The agent: a. clicks the link for adding a client b. inputs the client’s information c. sends a direct request to the client.
2. The client: a. accesses a digital service, where they b. accept or reject the request
3. The agent is updated with the client's response. If the client accepts HMRC discloses the client's MTDFB-VAT data to the agency. VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
3 Agent services get authority from new clients (UI) VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
3 Agent services get authority from new clients (UI)
What type of client do you need authorisation from?
- Individual
- Organisation
Continue VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
Agent services get authority from new clients (UI)
What do you want the client to authorise you to do?
- Report their income or expenses through software
- Report their VAT returns through software
Continue
Can’t see the option you’re looking for? VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
3 Agent services get authority from new clients (UI)
What is your client's VAT registration number?
This is the 9-digit number they received when they registered for VAT. For example, 123456789
Continue VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
3 Agent services get authority from new clients (UI)
What is your client's VAT registration date?
This will help us match their details against information we hold. For example, 31 8 15
Day Month Year
Continue VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
Agent services get authority from new clients (UI)
Send your client this link http://tax.service.gov.uk/agent-services/invitation/238712387163
What to do next You must share this unique link with your client and they must respond by 02 February 2018.
Copy and paste the link into an email. If your client does not respond in time, you will need to request authorisation again and send them the new link.
This is the only way your client can authorise you. HMRC will not share the link for you.
Return to your account
Is there anything wrong with this page?
BETA We are still working to improve this website, tell us what you think VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
3 Agent services get authority from new clients (UI)
Accept or decline a tax agent's request for authorisation
You need to authorise your tax agent if you want them to report your VAT returns through software.
You will need to create or use a Government Gateway account for an organisation to continue.
What this means
The tax agent who sent you the request will have access to your VAT information through software. Sometimes HMRC will contact you as well as the agent, or instead of them.
Accept invitation Decline invitation VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
Agent services get authority from new clients (UI)
Sign in
Enter your Government Gateway credentials to sign in. You received these when you created your HMRC online account.
User ID
Password
Sign in
Problems signing in
- Trying to file Self Assessment using GOV.UK Verify?
- Don't have a Government Gateway account
- Forgotten user ID
- Forgotten password
- Forgotten user ID and password
- Get help from HMRC's automated assistant VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
3 Agent services get authority from new clients (UI)
Confirm your identity
We just need to confirm who you are
We’re going to ask you some security questions based on information HMRC hold on you.
This is to help protect your data.
Continue
Report a problem
Tell us about a problem you’ve encountered or something that needs to improve. VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
3 Agent services get authority from new clients (UI)
Agency Name wants to represent you to HMRC
Would you like Already Subscribed Agency to report your VAT returns through software?
☐ Yes ☐ No
Continue VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
3 Agent services get authority from new clients (UI)
Confirm that you understand
By accepting the invitation, you are agreeing that Agency Name will:
- use accounting software that supports Making Tax Digital to record your sales and purchases, then to submit your VAT returns
- submit each VAT return within one calendar month and 7 days from the end of your accounting period
- tell HMRC if you stop trading and then submit your final VAT return
- tell HMRC if you want to leave this trial
I understand Agency Name will be granted access to my VAT information
Authorise tax agent VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
3 Agent services get authority from new clients (UI)
Agent authorisation complete
What this means
Agency Name is now confirmed as your tax agent for reporting your VAT returns through software.
Continue to your tax account VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
4 - Customer/Agent signs up to MTD 4a - Agent signs up a Sole Trader 4b - A Sole Trader signs up In April 2018 we delivered the sign-up service that enables existing VAT users to move to the MTD service. A user who wants to use the MTD service for VAT must sign up before first use, even if they have already signed up for MTD for income tax.
Agents can sign up an existing client’s business. However, the creation of the agent account which is a one-off process must be completed to enable an agent firm to sign up their clients.
We will develop supporting content that allows a customer to identify whether they need to:
- register for tax and then sign up for MTD
- sign up only.
After a customer signs up they are informed of their update obligations.
The sign-up service requests minimal information from the customer such as e-mail address. It reuses information provided as part of identity checking.
HMRC will enable customers to register and sign up through GOV.UK. Developers can link to the service from their software. Customer/Agent signs up to MTD VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Customer/Agent signs up to MTD
Sign in
Enter your Government Gateway credentials to sign in. You received these when you created your HMRC online account.
User ID
Password
Sign in
Problems signing in
Don't have a Government Gateway account Forgotten user ID Forgotten password Forgotten user ID and password Agent signs up a Sole Trader
This error message is displayed if the Agent has not yet created their agent account. Agent signs up a Sole Trader
What is your client's VAT number? This is the 9 digit number they received when they registered for VAT. For example, 123456789
Continue
Get help with this case. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
4a Agent signs up a Sole Trader
GOV.UK
Use software to submit your VAT returns
ALPHA This is a new service – your feedback will help us to improve it.
Back
Your client can’t use this service yet
This service is only available to some limited companies and sole traders.
You’ll be able to sign up your client for this service by April 2019.
Sign out Agent signs up a Sole Trader
What type of business is your client registered as?
- Sole trader
- Limited company
- Other
Continue Agent signs up a Sole Trader
Enter your client's details
We will attempt to match these details against information we currently hold.
First name
Last name
National Insurance number For example, 'Q123456C'.
Date of birth For example, 10 12 1990 Day Month Year
Continue Agent signs up a Sole Trader
What is your email address?
We will only send you an email to let you know if your client can join the trial.
For example, me@me.com
Continue
Get help with this page. Agent signs up a Sole Trader
Confirm your email address
me@me.com
Confirm
Change email address
Get help with this name. Agent signs up a Sole Trader This is only done once
Verify your email address
We have sent an email to me@me.com. Click on the link in the email to verify your email address.
You can change your email address if it is not correct.
- I did not get an email
Get help with this page. Agent signs up a Sole Trader
You have verified your email address
You need to continue to sign up your client. We will send you a confirmation message after you sign up this client.
Continue
Get help with this page. Agent signs up a Sole Trader
Agree for your client to get secure messages from HMRC
To join this trial, your client must agree to get secure messages instead of letters.
When your client has a new message about VAT in their business tax account, we will send an email notification to let them know.
Your client will need to sign in to their business tax account to read their secure messages.
Agree
Sign out
Get help with this page. Agent signs up a Sole Trader
What is your client’s email address?
For example, me@me.com
Continue
Get help with this now. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
4a Agent signs up a Sole Trader
Check your client’s email address
Email address
Confirm and continue
Change email address
Get help with this step. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
4a Agent signs up a Sole Trader
We’ve sent your client an email
We’ve sent an email to . Your client needs to click on the link in the email to verify their email address.
They need to verify their email address to get VAT emails from HMRC.
Continue
Get help with this page. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Agent signs up a Sole Trader
Terms of participation
By taking part in this trial, you agree that either you or your client will:
- use accounting software that supports Making Tax Digital to record your client’s sales and purchases, then to submit their VAT Returns
- submit each VAT Return within one calendar month and 7 days from the end of your accounting period
- tell HMRC if your client stops trading and then submit their final VAT Return
- tell HMRC if your client wants to leave this trial
These terms aren’t contractual and your client can leave the trial at any time.
Accept and continue
Get help with this page. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
4a Agent signs up a Sole Trader
Please Note: The link to ‘Choose accounting software’ will remain inactive until the point of leaving CGL. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
4b A Sole Trader signs up
Individual Sign Up to VAT-MTD [2] VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
A Sole Trader signs up
Sign in
Enter your Government Gateway credentials to sign in. You received these when you created your HMRC online account.
User ID
Password
Sign in
Problems signing in
Don't have a Government Gateway account Forgotten user ID Forgotten password Forgotten user ID and password VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
4b A Sole Trader signs up
You can’t use this service yet
This service is only available to some limited companies and sole traders.
You’ll be able to sign up for this service by April 2019. A Sole Trader signs up
Do you have more than one VAT registered business?
- Yes
- No
Continue VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
4b A Sole Trader signs up
What type of business are you registered as?
- Sole trader
- Limited company
- Other
Continue VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
4b A Sole Trader signs up
If you have previously filed online using this Government Gateway credential you will not see this.
Confirm your identity
We just need to confirm who you are
We're going to ask you some security questions based on information HMRC hold on you.
This is to help protect your data.
Continue VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
4b A Sole Trader signs up
Confirm your identity
Enter your details
First name
Last name
Date of birth
For example, 2/3/1990
Day
Month
Year
National insurance number
For example, M123456789 or 123456789
Confirm
Choose a way for us to identify you
We'll ask you some security questions that relate to you:
- Passport
- PIN
- Pay slips
- As credit payments
Continue
I don't have that information
Do you have a valid UK passport?
Yes
No
Continue
Your UK passport
Enter your details exactly as they appear on your passport.
Where to find these details on your passport
Passport number
Your passport number contains 9 numbers and no letters.
Surname
Exactly as it appears on your passport.
Given names
Enter all given names, as they appear on your passport.
Expiry date of your passport
For example, 1 FEB 2018
Day
Month
Year
Continue
I don't have that information A Sole Trader signs up
Confirm your details
First name: Alex Last name: Fisher Date of birth: 12 December 1990
These details are not correct Continue
If you have previously filed online using this Government Gateway credential you arrive here. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
A Sole Trader signs up
Agree to get emails instead of letters
When you have a new message about VAT in your HMRC account, we’ll send you an email to let you know.
You’ll need to sign in to your account to read the message.
Agree and continue
Sign out
Get help with this page VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
4b A Sole Trader signs up
What is your email address? For example, me@me.com
Continue
Get help with this page. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
A Sole Trader signs up
Check your email address
Email address
Confirm and continue
Change email address
Get help with this page. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
A Sole Trader signs up
Verify your email address
We've sent an email to . Click on the link in the email to verify your email address.
Get help with this case. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
4b A Sole Trader signs up
You've verified your email address You'll now receive messages and email notifications from HMRC.
Continue to sign up
Get help with this case. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
A Sole Trader signs up
Terms of participation
By taking part in this trial, you agree to:
- use accounting software that supports Making Tax Digital to record your sales and purchases, then to submit your VAT returns
- submit each VAT return within one calendar month and 7 days from the end of your accounting period
- authorise any third party you use (such as your accountant) and be responsible for any information they give to HMRC on your behalf
- tell HMRC if you stop trading and then submit your final VAT return
- tell HMRC if you want to leave this trial
These terms aren’t contractual and you can stop taking part in the trial at any time.
Accept and continue
Get help with this page. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
A Sole Trader signs up
We’ve received your information
What happens next We’ll let you know whether you can use software to submit your VAT Returns, usually within 24 hours.
After your application is approved
1. Choose accounting software that supports this service if you haven’t already.
2. Sign in to the software with your Government Gateway details and authorise it to interact with HMRC.
3. Add any sales and purchases that you’ve already received or paid out.
4. Record your future sales and purchases using the software.
5. Submit your VAT Returns before your deadlines.
You can view your VAT Return deadlines in your accounting software or business tax account.
Sign out
Get help with this page
Please Note: The link to ‘Choose accounting software’ will remain inactive until the point of leaving CGL. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
5 - Customer/Agents links software to HMRC via OAuth Users of software that connects to the HMRC Developer Hub APIs must give their software permission to interact with their data and HMRC. Please note this can be done before or after a customer has signed up for the MTD VAT service.
The software user grants the software the authority to interact with HMRC on their behalf - for a set of functions or ‘API scopes’.
The software must include each scope for which the user must grant permission the authorise call. This is explained in the authorisation section of the Developer Hub: https://developer.service.hmrc.gov.uk/api-documentation/docs/authorisation
If the user grants permission, the software receives an authorisation code that can be used to gain an OAuth access token for that user and a refresh token. The access token expires periodically and must be refreshed. After 18 months the access token fully expires and the end user must grant authority again.
For an Agent, when connecting software to HMRC, the new GGW user Agent ID which was generated as part of the agent services account journey will be the GGW user Agent ID which needs to be connected. If another ID is attempted to be logged in with, an error message will be presented to the user. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
6 - Customer/agent retrieves obligations in software 7 - Customer/agent submits VAT return with declaration, in software VAT API sequence to submit a return
1. Retrieve VAT obligations /organisations/vat/{vrn}/obligations To retrieve open obligations and the relevant period key for return. Status field to contain either O or leave blank.
2. Submit VAT return for Period /organisations/vat/{vrn}/returns Using the period Key associated with the relevant obligation And confirming the customers declaration.
3. Retrieve VAT obligations /organisations/vat/{vrn}/obligations To establish if the obligation has been met – Status field to contain F To establish if obligation has been met and see next obligation status field to be blank.
1 and 2 are mandatory steps 3 is an optional step This API allows software to search for obligations based on a date range (start and end) and a status (open O, fulfilled F, or all) of the obligations.
If the status is
- fulfilled (F), the received date is included
- Open (O), the due date is used
- If status field is left blank then you will get both open and fulfilled obligations returned
It also gives the relevant periodKey associated with that specific obligation.
A new obligation is generated on the first day of the period, whether the previous obligation has been fulfilled or not. Software will be able to search for previous open and/or fulfilled obligations but will only be able to call the next obligation.
**Note:** MTD-VAT will be supporting more customer types throughout controlled go live and as they come on board this endpoint will return obligation information for customers that are on monthly, annual and other non standard staggers.
**Note** Period Keys should not be shown to the customer, these are for software use to ensure the return is recorded against the correct obligation.
______________________________________________________________________
**Example format Period keys for stagger types**
**Monthly**
- 18AD 30.04.2018
- 18AE 31.05.2018
- 18AF 30.06.2018
**Quarterly**
- 18A1 30.04.2018
- 18A2 31.07.2018
- 18A3 31.10.2018
- 18A4 31.01.2019
**Note** we have not yet configured annual period keys as annual accounting is not in scope for MVP.
The Period key is the ID code for the period that this obligation belongs to. The format is a string of four alphanumeric characters. Occasionally for special periods, the format includes a # symbol (e.g. #001), which must be URL-encoded. On these occasions the period key will need to be URL-encoded. For example 18AD, 18A1, #001 This is the only post endpoint. The data items required are the same as the current 9 Box return. The period key that is relevant to the obligation needs to be provided as part of the return.
HMRC also requires software to show their customers a declaration that they must confirm before the return is sent to HMRC, confirmation that this has been done is reflected by the “finalised” true. The return will not be accepted without this.
Declaration text to be used if businesses make the submission;
When you submit this VAT information you are making a legal declaration that the information is true and complete. A false declaration can result in prosecution.
Declaration text to be used if only Agents make the submission;
I confirm that my client has received a copy of the information contained in this return and approved the information as being correct and complete to the best of their knowledge and belief. VAT API sequence to View a previously submitted return
1. Retrieve VAT obligations /organisations/vat/{vrn}/obligations
To retrieve period key for the submission you want to retrieve In status field enter F to see all fulfilled obligations within a date range or leave blank to receive open and fulfilled ones
2. View VAT Returns /organisations/vat/{vrn}/returns/{periodKey}
Use the period key to call the correct return
I have not included example for liabilities and payments as they are straightforward GET calls with no other dependencies and are optional Software will be able to retrieve any return that has been submitted up to four years previously.
To get this information the `periodKey` for the relevant return is required.
You will not be able to retrieve returns filed before joining MTD through the API’s.
```json
"periodKey": "#001",
"vatDueSales": 100.00,
"vatDueAcquisitions": 100.00,
"totalVatDue": 200,
"vatReclaimedCurrPeriod": 100.00,
"netVatDue": 100,
"totalValueSalesExVAT": 500,
"totalValuePurchasesExVAT": 500,
"totalValueGoodsSuppliedExVAT": 500,
"totalAcquisitionsExVAT": 500
```
VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
8 - Customer/agent amends previously submitted data The current process for correcting errors on a submitted VAT Return remains.
- If the net value of the errors is below £10,000, or between £10,000 and £50,000 and does not exceed 1% of the box 6 amount, the user can adjust their current VAT Return (method 1)
- If the net value of the errors is greater than that, the user must notify HMRC in writing with full details of the errors (method 2)
A user can choose to use method 2 and notify HMRC separately in any case.
Please ensure customers are made aware of these methods. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
9 - Customer sets up, views, cancels, amends or makes a payment by Direct Debit Customer sets up, views, cancels, amends or makes a payment by Direct Debit
HMRC would like vendors to present messages to business users at key points in their journey that give them the option to make payments.
There are multiple ways to pay a VAT bill, listed on GOV.UK at Pay your VAT bill, each taking different amounts of time to clear. HMRC advise vendors in their messaging to ask customers to visit that link so the customer can make a payment in the method that best suits them and in time to meet the deadline.
With the arrival of MTD-VAT the contents of this GOV.UK page are subject to change. Likewise the URL may change in which case we will update the link above.
For businesses to see previous payments they’ve made to HMRC, we would like vendors to show messages at key points in their journey that encourage them to visit their Business Tax Account (login page is https://www.tax.service.gov.uk/gg/sign-in?continue=/business-account)
Using their Business Tax Account customers can:
- check any VAT Direct Debit arrangements they have with HMRC
- make changes, or cancel their Direct Debit
- set up a new Direct Debit instruction
- make a corporate credit or debit card payment
This page will also provide details of HMRC’s bank account for customers wanting to pay by Bacs, CHAPs or by faster payments VAT business E2E journey roadmap
Customer sets up Direct Debit
Choose a way to pay your VAT return
- Direct Debit
- Bank transfer
- Debit or corporate credit card
Other ways to pay
Continue
Get help with this page Customer sets up Direct Debit
Enter account details to set up your Direct Debit
Name on the account Sort code Account number
Are you the only person required to authorise a Direct Debit account?
- Yes
- No
Check your Direct Debit details are correct
Account name Sort code Account number
Payments will appear on your bank statement as 'HMRC E VAT DDS'
You are covered by the Direct Debit Guarantee
Confirm
Direct Debit successful Reference 999984111
We have sent you a confirmation email with details of the date of your first payment.
What happens next
Your payments for your VAT Return will be taken automatically by Direct Debit. We will give you advance notice of your payment 2 days before it is taken from your account.
You can view your Direct Debit details immediately on your VAT Tax Account.
Contact us about your Direct Debit
Call 0300 200 3700 and quote your reference.
Print this page
Return to your VAT details VAT business E2E journey roadmap
Customer views Direct Debit
What you owe
£1224 due by 7 May 2018 due for the period 1 Jan to 31 Mar 2018
Direct debits You can view your direct debit details.
If what you owe is incorrect, check if you can correct errors on your VAT Return (opens in a new tab).
After you have submitted a return, it can take 24 hours for what you owe to show here. You can still make a payment (opens in a new tab). Customer cancels Direct Debit
A Direct Debit is set up for your VAT Return
We will collect your VAT Return payment from this account.
Account name: A. N. Other Sort code: 12 32 67 Account number: \*\*\*\*5678
Cancel or amend my Direct Debit
Cancel your Direct Debit Amend your Direct Debit
Cancel your Direct Debit for your VAT return
If you cancel your Direct Debit, you may need to pay by an alternative method for your next VAT Return. Customer cancels Direct Debit
What happens next We have sent you a confirmation email.
Contact us about your Direct Debit If you have any questions on your Direct Debit cancellation, call us on 0300 200 3700.
Print this page
Return to your VAT details VAT business E2E journey roadmap
Customer amend Direct Debit
A Direct Debit is set up for your VAT Return
We will collect your VAT Return payment from this account.
Account name: A. N. Other Sort code: 12 32 67 Account number: \*\*\*\*5678
Cancel or amend my Direct Debit
Cancel your Direct Debit Amend your Direct Debit
Continue Customer amend Direct Debit
Amend your Direct Debit details for your VAT return
Name on the account
Sort code
Account number
Are you the only person required to authorise a Direct Debit from this account?
Yes No
Continue
Check your Direct Debit details are correct
Account name
Sort code
Account number
Payments will appear on your bank statement as 'HMRC E VAT DDS'.
You are covered by the Direct Debit Guarantee
Confirm
Get help with this page Customer makes a payment by Direct Debit
Direct Debit successful Your direct debit has been amended Reference 999984111
We have sent you a confirmation email with details of the date of your first payment.
What happens next Your payments for your VAT Return will be taken automatically by Direct Debit. We will give you advance notice of your payment 2 days before it is taken from your account.
You can view your Direct Debit details immediately on your VAT Tax Account.
Contact us about your Direct Debit Call 0300 200 3700 and quote your reference.
Print this page Return to your VAT details Get help with this page VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
10 - Customer/Agent makes a payment (other types) HMRC would like vendors to present messages to business users at key points in their journey that give them the option to make payments.
There are multiple ways to pay a VAT bill, listed at Pay your VAT bill page of GOV.UK, each taking different amounts of time to clear. HMRC advise vendors in their messaging to ask customers to visit that link so the customer can make a payment in the method that best suits them and in time to meet the deadline.
With the arrival of MTD-VAT the contents of this GOV.UK page are subject to change. Likewise the URL may change in which case we will update the link above.
For a Business to see previous payments that they’ve made to HMRC, we would like vendors to show messages at key points in their journey that encourage them to visit their Business Tax Account (login page is https://www.tax.service.gov.uk/gg/sign-in?continue=/business-account).
Using the Business Tax Account, customers can:
- check any VAT Direct Debit arrangements they may have with HMRC
- make changes, or cancel their Direct Debit
- set up a new Direct Debit agreement
- make a corporate credit or debit card payment
This page will also give details of HMRC’s bank account for customers wanting to pay by Bacs, CHAPs or by faster payments VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
11 - Customer/agents receives a repayment HMRC would like vendors to present messages to business users at key points in their journey that give them the option to make payments.
There are multiple ways to pay a VAT bill, listed on the Pay your VAT bill page of GOV.UK. HMRC advise vendors in their messaging to ask customers to visit that link so the customer can make a payment in the method that best suits them.
With the arrival of MTD-VAT the contents of this GOV.UK page are subject to change. Likewise the URL may change in which case we will update the link above.
For a Business to see previous payments they've made to HMRC, we would like vendors to show messages at key points in their journey that encourage them to visit their Business Tax Account.(login page is https://www.tax.service.gov.uk/gg/sign-in?continue=/business-account).
Using their Business Tax Account, customers can:
- check any VAT Direct Debit arrangements they may have with HMRC
- make changes, or cancel their Direct Debit
- set up a new Direct Debit agreement
- make a corporate credit or debit card payment
This page will also give details of HMRC’s bank account for customers wanting to pay by Bacs, CHAPs or by faster payments VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
12 - Customer/agent notifies change of circumstances HMRC would like vendors to present messages to business users regularly to remind them to check and update their details with HMRC.
They will be able to do that by visiting their Business Tax Account. The login page is https://www.tax.service.gov.uk/gg/sign-in?continue=/business-account, and by visiting that link businesses will be able to update a range of information, including addresses, telephone numbers, e-mail and business type.
Until MTD-VAT goes into Live service there will be a manual process in place whereby a customer can contact HMRC directly for a manual change to be made to their details.
For exiting controlled go live functionality will be available for customers to make the most regular changes with more functionality being added up until go live early 2019. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
### VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
#### Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
| Business name | ABC Digital Ltd | |---------------------|-----------------| | Business address | 30 Romford Road, Wellington, Telford, Shropshire, TF1 4ER, United Kingdom | | Bank account for repayments only | Account number: ****1234, Sort code: 12**** | | VAT Return dates | January, April, July and October |
This is a new service – your feedback will help us to improve it.
[GOV.UK Business tax account](https://www.gov.uk/business-tax-account) · Your VAT details · Change of business details
© Crown copyright VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
Choose the new VAT Return dates
The VAT Return dates are currently January, April, July and October
- February, May, August and November
- March, June, September and December
- Every month
Continue Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
Confirm the new VAT Return dates
The new VAT Return dates are February, May, August and November
Change the VAT Return dates
By confirming this change, you agree that the information you have given is complete and correct.
Confirm and continue Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
We have received the new VAT Return dates
What happens next
We will send a confirmation letter. This usually takes 2 working days.
The business must submit this period’s return before following the new VAT Return dates
Finish
### VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
**Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances**
| GOV.UK | Business tax account | Sign out | |--------|----------------------|---------| | | This is a new service — your feedback will help us to improve it. | | | | Business tax account | Your bill details | Change of business details |
#### Your VAT details
**Change of business details**
**About the business**
- **Business name**: ABC Digital Ltd
- **Principal place of business**: 3 Blomford Road, Wellington, Telford, Shropshire, TF1 4ER
- **Bank account for repayments only**: Account number \*\*\*\* \*\*\*\* \*\*\*\* \*\*\*\*
- **VAT Return dates**: February, May, August and November
**Contact details**
- **Email address**: johns.t@abcdigital.com
- **Correspondence address**: 9 Blomford Road, Wellington, Telford, Shropshire, TF1 4ER, United Kingdom
**Your registration**
- **Status**: Registered
______________________________________________________________________
**HM Revenue & Customs**
© Crown copyright VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
What is the new ‘principal place of business’?
This is where ABC DIGITAL LIMITED does most of its work.
If this is in different locations, use the address where it keeps its business records. This could be a home address.
Property name or number For example, The Mill, Flat A
Postcode For example, ZZ1 1TA
The address does not have a post code
Find address VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
Confirm the new principal place of business
5 Romford Road Wellington Telford Shropshire TF1 4ER United Kingdom
By confirming this change, you agree that the information you have given is complete and correct.
Confirm and continue Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
We have received the new principal place of business
You can also change your correspondence address.
What happens next
We will send a confirmation letter. This usually takes 2 working days.
You will need to change the business address for other taxes separately.
Finish Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
| Business tax account | Sign out | |----------------------|---------| | GOV.UK | |
**Your VAT details**
**Change of business details**
**About the business**
- **Business name**: ABC Digital Ltd
- **Principal place of business**: 5 Remford Road, Wellington, Telford, Shropshire, TF1 4ER
- **Bank account for repayments only**: Account number ****7234, Sort code 12****
- **VAT Return dates**: January, April, July and October
**Contact details**
- **Email address**: john.b@abcdigital.com
- **Correspondence address**: 5 Remford Road, Wellington, Telford, Shropshire, TF1 4ER, United Kingdom
**Your registration**
- **Status**: Registered VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
Enter the new bank details
This bank account is for repayments only
Name on the account
Sort code
Account number
Continue VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
Enter the new bank details
This bank account is for repayments only
Name on the account Joe Bloggs
Sort code 20 20 10
Account number 0123456789
Continue VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
Confirm the new bank details
Account name: Joe Bloggs Sort code: 20-20-10 Account number: 0123456789
Change
By confirming this change, you agree the the information you have given is complete and correct.
Confirm and continue Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
We have received the new bank details for repayments
What happens next
If this change is accepted, we will usually update your details within 2 working days.
Finish VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Customers/agents notifies change of circumstances
Change the business name
The business name is currently ABC Digital Ltd.
You will be taken to Companies House to change it. The business name will automatically update with HMRC too.
Changing the business name costs:
- £8 to update within 2 working days
- £30 to update on the same day
Companies House will send you an email notification, a secure message and a new certificate when the details have changed.
Continue to Companies House (opens in new tab) VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
13 - Customer can view previous returns in BTA 14 - Customer can view when their next return is due in BTA 15 - Customer can view when their next payment is due, along with the ability to make payments via BTA Businesses may wish to view information in relation to their VAT. A user may also like assurance, which may help them when managing their tax affairs. This will also include viewing their previous updates that HMRC have received.
HMRC encourage vendors to make these features within their software products. Vendors can also direct users to visit their Business Tax Account, the login page attached below:
https://www.tax.service.gov.uk/gg/sign-in?continue=/business-account.
From April 2018, if a user has volunteered for pilot and signed up for MTD, they will have the option to use and view information within their Business Tax Account. This will include information such as: viewing their return, payment obligations and the option to link off from their Business Tax Account and make an online card payment. VAT business E2E journey roadmap
Customers can view previous returns in BTA Customers can view previous returns in BTA Customers can view previous returns in BTA
Submitted returns
2018
Previous returns
2018 returns
You haven’t submitted any returns for 2018 yet. You must use accounting software to submit your returns. Customer can view when their next return is due in BTA VAT business E2E journey roadmap
Customer can view when their next return is due in BTA
Return deadlines
Use your accounting software to submit a return by:
7 August 2018 for the period 1 April to 31 June 2018
How to submit a return
1. Choose accounting software that supports this service (opens in a new tab) if you haven’t already.
2. Keep your VAT records in your accounting software.
3. Submit any VAT Returns before your deadlines. Customer can view when their next payment is due, along with the ability to make payments via BTA Customer can view when their next payment is due, along with the ability to make payments via BTA
What you owe
£1224 due by 7 May 2018 for the period 1 January to 31 March 2018
Your payment could take up to 5 days to process. You’ll be fined if it’s late.
Direct debits If you’ve already set up a direct debit, you don’t need to pay now. You can view your direct debits if you’re not sure.
► What I owe is incorrect or missing VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
16 - Appeals process (BAU Process) The existing process for Appeals will remain in place. A customer may contact HMRC if they have a query about a tax decision. If they don’t understand the decision they can also get advice from HMRC or professional help. VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
17 - Agent Services VAT client led de-authorisation VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
Agent Services VAT client led de-authorisation
Sign in
Enter your Government Gateway credentials to sign in. You received these when you created your HMRC online account.
User ID
Password
Sign in
Problems signing in
- Trying to file Self Assessment using GOV.UK Verify?
- Don't have a Government Gateway account
- Forgotten user ID
- Forgotten password
- Forgotten user ID and password
Get help from HMRC's automated assistant
## Manage your tax agents
| Agency name | Viewable services | Actions | |-------------|------------------|------------------| | Agency Name | Income record | Remove authorisation | | Agency Name | Report VAT returns through software | Remove authorisation |
Get help with this case. Remove authorisation for Agency Name
If you remove your authorisation, Already Subscribed Agency will not longer be able to report your VAT returns through software.
Are you sure you want to remove authorisation for Agency Name?
- Yes
- No
Continue Already Subscribed Agency can no longer report your VAT returns through software
If you want to allow Already Subscribed Agency to report your VAT returns through software, ask them to send you a new authorisation request.
Continue VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
18 - GOV.UK guidance available We continue to use GOV.UK as our main way to guide users about government services and information, although we will not publish guidance about how to join the VAT pilot until we exit the controlled go live period of the pilot and enter public beta. Initially, the guidance will:
- signpost a few more detailed, task-based content pages on GOV.UK starting with:
- an overview of MTD
- choose software page
- sign up
- help build awareness about what MTD means for users and agents
- signpost the route for customer support (See Customer Support Model section for further details), including how vendors can contact HMRC teams
- manage users’ concerns if not eligible yet, or there’s no legal requirement for them yet.
- help us (HMRC) manage the messages users need to know over coming months and years - who is eligible, why signing up early might help you, when this will become mandatory and so on.
As we make more functionality live, we’ll add more task-based guidance onto GOV.UK to ensure that users can continue their journey. For example, ‘Sign up to report VAT through software’ ‘Choose software’ and so on.
As MTD becomes more mainstream, we will reduce campaign content and presence.
We would like your package to make users aware of the links to the guidance detailed above if they are interested in the service. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
GOV.UK guidance available
Use software to submit your VAT Returns
If you submit VAT Returns for a limited company or you are a sole trader, you may be able to join the Making Tax Digital pilot for VAT.
Published 19 September 2018 Last updated 1 October 2018 — see all updates
Contents — Who can use this service — How it works — Sign up for the pilot — If you need help with your software
HMRC is changing the way you submit your VAT Returns. From April 2019, most VAT registered businesses with a turnover above £85,000 must use Making Tax Digital compatible software to keep their records and submit their VAT Returns.
Instead of waiting until then, you can get compatible software now and try this new way of submitting your returns so you’re ready when the changes come in. By signing up to HMRC’s secure service, you’re helping test a new way of working as part of the Making Tax Digital pilot.
Who can use this service
You may qualify for the pilot if you use a standard accounting period, you are up to date with your VAT, and your... VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
GOV.UK guidance available
Who can use this service
You may qualify for the pilot if you use a standard accounting period, you are up to date with your VAT, and you:
- are a sole trader
- currently submit the VAT Return for a limited company
You will not be able to take part in the pilot at the moment if you:
- are a trust or charity
- are part of a VAT group or VAT Division
- trade with the EU
- are based overseas
- are a partnership
- submit annual returns
- make VAT payments on account
This pilot will be opened to more businesses. Check back regularly to see if it has been extended to include you.
How it works
If you qualify you can choose the right software for you. If you already use software, check with your provider to see if you can use it with this pilot. You might want to use more than one product, provided they link together digitally.
Then you can:
- sign up for the Making Tax Digital pilot
- use software to keep your business records, prepare your next VAT Return, and submit it to HMRC
You can still choose to:
- get your agent to submit your VAT Returns
- view your next VAT Return deadline in your Business Tax Account VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
GOV.UK guidance available
Sign up for the pilot
You’ll need to have:
- the Government Gateway details you use to submit your VAT Returns online
- your VAT registration number
You may also be asked to confirm your details.
Sign up
If you need help with your software
Check with your software provider if you need help, for example with keeping your sales and purchase records, or submitting your VAT Returns.
If you have another query about the Making Tax Digital pilot for VAT, contact HMRC.
Published 19 September 2018 Last updated 1 October 2018
↑ Contacts VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
19 - Subscription service available for businesses and agents Subscription service available for businesses and agents
Post April 2019 we will deliver a Subscription (formerly known as VAT Registration) service that will allow businesses new to VAT to subscribe and at the same time as they sign up to MTD.
Until this service is delivered, new customers will need to subscribe for VAT using the existing service, then navigate to the sign up service and complete that journey.
The service will request information about the business and the person running it. Following successful subscription the customer will be informed of their Return deadlines.
Agents must already be subscribed with HMRC’s Agent Services in order to access the new VAT subscription service on behalf of clients. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
20 - Choose software GOV.UK page available HMRC will publish a list of software that is MTD-compatible on GOV.UK. so that businesses and agents can choose the right software for them.
See an example of this format being used for MTD Income Tax: https://www.gov.uk/guidance/software-for-sending-income-tax-updates.
HMRC is considering the design of this page (an early draft can be found on the next slide), working with the software industry.
HMRC requires that each package made available to customers complies with the Terms of Use https://developer.service.hmrc.gov.uk/api-documentation/docs/terms-of-use which have to be accepted by software developers before production credentials are issued. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Choose software GOV.UK page available
Guidance
Find software suppliers for sending VAT Returns and Income Tax updates
Find out which software packages support the Making Tax Digital pilots.
Published 1 October 2018 Last updated 1 October 2018 — see all updates
Contents — Overview — Software providers
Overview
If you sign up to the Making Tax Digital pilot, you’ll need software packages that, depending on your needs, let you:
• send Income Tax updates • [submit VAT Returns] (this will link to new business guide)
If you’re an agent and you sign clients up to the pilots, you’ll need one that lets you send these to HMRC on their behalf.
You’ll need this software to keep records of income and expenses for Income Tax, or sales and purchases for VAT. If you’re already using software to keep records, check with your provider when the software will be ready to allow you to send updates and submit returns to HMRC throughout the year. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Choose software GOV.UK page available
Software providers
More providers and software will be available and added to the alphabetical lists below as the Making Tax Digital pilots progress.
Find compatible software for:
- both Income Tax and VAT
- Income Tax only
- VAT only
Compatible software for both Income Tax and VAT
| Software provider | Who can use it | Feature(s) | |-------------------|---------------|------------| | A2X | Agents and businesses | Digital record keeping, Updates to MTD for self-employment, Updates to MTD for UK companies (excluding furnished holiday lets), Tax returns from MTD based on provided updates | | Avantax | Businesses | Digital record keeping, Updates to MTD for self-employment, Updates to MTD for UK companies (excluding furnished holiday lets), Tax returns from MTD based on provided updates |
Compatible software for Income Tax only
| Software provider | Who can use it | Feature(s) | |-------------------|---------------|------------| | Absolute | Agents and businesses | Digital record keeping, Updates to MTD for self-employment, Updates to MTD for UK companies (excluding furnished holiday lets), Tax returns from MTD based on provided updates | | Pandle | Agents and businesses | Digital record keeping, Updates to MTD for self-employment, Updates to MTD for UK companies (excluding furnished holiday lets), Tax returns from MTD based on provided updates | | PAYE | Agents | Digital record keeping, Updates to MTD for self-employment, Updates to MTD for UK companies (excluding furnished holiday lets), Tax returns from MTD based on provided updates | Choose software GOV.UK page available
| Software provider | Who can use this | Feature(s) | |-------------------|------------------|------------| | S-Text | Agents | Digital record keeping, Updates to HMRC for self-employment, Updates to HMRC for UK property (excluding furnished holiday lettings), Tax estimates from HMRC based on provided updates | | O-Text | Agents and businesses | Digital record keeping, Updates to HMRC for self-employment, Updates to HMRC for UK property (excluding furnished holiday lettings), Tax estimates from HMRC based on provided updates |
HMRC does not recommend or endorse any one product or software provider and is not responsible for any problems you have with software.
Published 1 October 2016 Last updated 1 October 2018 VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
21 - Obligation Reminders VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
21 Obligation Reminders
Content TBC VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
22 - Voluntary Supplementary Data Voluntary Supplementary Data
Content TBC VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
23 - Request a VAT Refund VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
23 Request a VAT Refund
Content TBC VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
24 - Voluntary payments VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
24 Voluntary Payments
Content TBC VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
25 - Repayment Tracker VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
25 Repayment Tracker
Content TBC VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
26 - Payment Reminders VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
Payment Reminders
Content TBC VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
27 - View and Change to non-MTD and former MTD customers VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
27 View and Change to non-MTD and former MTD customers
Content TBC VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
28 - Customer/agent can see interest and penalties in BTA Customer/agent can see interest and penalties
Existing penalties and notification methods will remain in place for service users;
- Late registration - Factsheet CC/FS11
- Late Filing - VAT Notice 700/50
- Late Payment - VAT Notice 700/50
- Inaccuracy penalties - Factsheet CC/FS7
- Wrongdoing penalty - Factsheet CC/FS12
- Retention of records - VAT Notice 700/21
- Breaches of regulations - VAT Notice 700/21
- Default interest - VAT Notice 700/43 VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
29 - Voluntary MTD Customer/agent asks to leave MTDfB VAT Initially there is a manual process in place whereby a Customer/Agent can contact the HMRC helpline to notify their requirement to unsubscribe from the service.
In the event that the customer continues to be VAT registered, if necessary VAT returns can be submitted manually.
In time the manual process will be replaced by a user interface. VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
30 - Agent led De-authorisation VAT business/agent E2E journey roadmap
30 Agent led De-authorisation
Content TBC VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
31 - Agent leaves Agent Services Agent leaves Agent services
This will initially be the usual process, which can be used to remove the agent reference number and Government Gateway (GGW) enrolment (HMRC-AS-AGENTS).
The scenario where this is needed is when an agency firm ceases trading.
If an agency no longer wants to participate in MTD, they can stop using their GGW ID.
We are currently working to include a UI for this journey as part of the wider change of circumstances solution. VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
32 - Update Agency designatory details VAT agent E2E journey roadmap
32 Update Agency designatory details
Content TBC Customer support model Customer support model
We are developing a Customer Support Model which will help guide HMRC Customers to the most appropriate support. This may be provided by HMRC or the software vendor depending on the issue. HMRC support will be provided through a variety of channels and options for seeking advice and support:
We wish to work with software vendors to provide a comprehensive support package that covers software usage, online access and technical issues, as well as straightforward tax queries.
Customers will be signposted to self-help through a suite of guidance products such as videos, webinars and e-learning, which is aimed at specific stages of the MTD journey. We will develop the content as we add new functionality.
A new dedicated team of advisers has been created to offer telephony and webchat support for MTD. The team can currently be contacted via the HMRC ‘Contact Us’ page. We will be developing new signposting on Gov.UK which will focus on digital and webchat support channels. This guidance will be updated as the model develops. MTDfB Customer Support Model
The Customer Support Model guides HMRC customers to the most appropriate support. This may be provided by HMRC or the software vendor depending on the issue.
- The support offering for software vendors includes guidance on GOV.UK and 1-2-1 support via the Software Developer Support Team SDST.
- Support for clients from third party software providers.
- The support offering for customers with general enquiries about Making Tax Digital includes one to many support via self serve products available on GOV.UK, guidance, videos, webinars) and links to MTD Customer Support Teams.
- Customers are able to contact the Digital Customer Support Team get help with this page’ links of the MTD user interface screens.
- Customers can contact our MTD Customer Support Team Operational Customer Support Model
It is the support given to customers to enable them to fulfil their obligations with HMRC. It includes:
- all touch points that Customer Support Teams and operational colleagues have in the end to end customer journeys (e.g. telephony, webchat, deskpro enquiries, transaction processing, complaints)
- proactive and reactive contact
- Access, capability (AD & NES), exemptions
- upstream compliance
- Security GOV.UK Income tax guidance & sign up to ITSA
Customer https://www.gov.uk/guidance/use-software-to-send-income-tax-updates
Agent Firm https://www.gov.uk/guidance/agents-use-software-to-send-income-tax-updates
VAT pages will be available on exit from CGL
## Self serve products on GOV.UK
### @ July 2018
| ITSA | [https://www.gov.uk/guidance/get-an-hmrc-agent-services-account](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/get-an-hmrc-agent-services-account) | Guidance & Set up or Sign in, links to contact HMRC | |------|-------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------| | ITSA | [https://www.gov.uk/guidance/software-for-sending-income-tax-updates](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/software-for-sending-income-tax-updates) | Software options | | ITSA & VAT | [https://www.gov.uk/guidance/help-and-support-for-making-tax-digital](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/help-and-support-for-making-tax-digital) | Webinars & Videos | | ITSA & VAT | [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/making-tax-digital-for-business-stakeholder-communications-pack](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/making-tax-digital-for-business-stakeholder-communications-pack) | Guidance and FAQ’s | | VAT | [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/software-suppliers-supporting-making-tax-digital-for-vat](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/software-suppliers-supporting-making-tax-digital-for-vat) | Software options | | VAT | [https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vat-notice-70022-making-tax-digital-for-vat](https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/vat-notice-70022-making-tax-digital-for-vat) | VAT Notice |
Will update as new products become available Digital Customer Support - Access to Deskpro
VAT Agent E2E Journey Roadmap
Error pages - Agent Services VAT Mapping
URL: /agent-mapping/not-enrolled
You can't connect this ID
You can only add Government Gateway IDs linked to your business. We can't process client IDs. If you need to add another agent Government Gateway ID, sign out and repeat the process.
Get help with this issue.
1. User tries to log in to mapping using a government waterway credential without the agent affinity group
2. User tries to log in to mapping using a government gateway credential that hasn't has an SA Agent Code enrolled to it
3. User enters incorrect log in details Extract from Software Vendor guide
The Customer Support Model guides HMRC Customers to the most appropriate support. This may be provided by HMRC or the software vendor depending on the issue.
The support offering for ITSA customers includes guidance on GOV.UK, support links on all HMRC UI pages, webchat, and telephony support.
Three live service customer journeys have been highlighted below as illustrative examples of typical support requests. For testing services HMRC will directly support you and customers through the process.
Customer has general enquiry about Making Tax Digital for Business
Customer has general enquiry about MTDfB
Refer to GOV.UK
Customer has software support enquiry
Is this an in house issue?
Yes
Resolving using normal processes
No
Is it an HMRC API issue?
Yes
Via your agreed escalation route refer to HMRC Software Developer Support Team
No
Is it a tax query / MTDfB question?
Yes
Refer to GOV.UK help pages for guidance
No API Support Model - MTDb
This is the agreed support model for MTDb suite of APIs.
MTDb API VAT Service Support Model v1.3
User contacts 3rd party Dev who resolves the issue
User contacts 3rd party Dev. Is this a tax question or technical question relating to APICAUH?
Tax question - refer customer to MTDb Campaign Page
Is the technical question commercially sensitive?
3rd Party raise issue via GitHub, who resolve query
SDST Tier 1 resolve query. If unable to resolve, escalated to SDST Tier 2
Resolve issue at SDST Tier 2
SDST Tier 2 resolve the issue or escalate appropriately
API Producer
API Platform
Business Owner
Issue resolved by escalation and passed back to SDST
SDST respond to 3rd Party Dev
\*\* Escalation is done via DeskPro, where appropriate escalation will be completed via Email to Business Owner escalations
\*\* Policy related queries will continue to come through the SDST mailbox and the BAU process will apply Please contact us with any queries...
Rob Speksnijder - Senior DSM for MTDfB at robert.speksnijder@hmrc.gsi.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2590-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 179,
"total-input-tokens": 183455,
"total-output-tokens": 24153,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
351,
1
],
[
351,
509,
2
],
[
509,
1766,
3
],
[
1766,
3133,
4
],
[
3133,
4770,
5
],
[
4770,
4868,
6
],
[
4868,
5257,
7
],
[
5257,
7923,
8
],
[
7923,
7991,
9
],
[
7991,
8763,
10
],
[
8763,
9130,
11
],
[
9130,
9876,
12
],
[
9876,
10257,
13
],
[
10257,
10680,
14
],
[
10680,
11234,
15
],
[
11234,
11606,
16
],
[
11606,
12508,
17
],
[
12508,
12840,
18
],
[
12840,
13172,
19
],
[
13172,
13667,
20
],
[
13667,
13734,
21
],
[
13734,
13807,
22
],
[
13807,
14471,
23
],
[
14471,
14542,
24
],
[
14542,
14895,
25
],
[
14895,
15893,
26
],
[
15893,
15979,
27
],
[
15979,
16627,
28
],
[
16627,
16711,
29
],
[
16711,
16887,
30
],
[
16887,
17170,
31
],
[
17170,
17407,
32
],
[
17407,
17654,
33
],
[
17654,
18323,
34
],
[
18323,
18888,
35
],
[
18888,
19359,
36
],
[
19359,
19734,
37
],
[
19734,
19972,
38
],
[
19972,
20590,
39
],
[
20590,
20848,
40
],
[
20848,
20991,
41
],
[
20991,
21931,
42
],
[
21931,
21962,
43
],
[
21962,
22317,
44
],
[
22317,
22433,
45
],
[
22433,
22627,
46
],
[
22627,
23024,
47
],
[
23024,
23157,
48
],
[
23157,
23433,
49
],
[
23433,
23634,
50
],
[
23634,
23759,
51
],
[
23759,
24045,
52
],
[
24045,
24265,
53
],
[
24265,
24705,
54
],
[
24705,
24831,
55
],
[
24831,
25023,
56
],
[
25023,
25343,
57
],
[
25343,
26014,
58
],
[
26014,
26194,
59
],
[
26194,
26295,
60
],
[
26295,
26642,
61
],
[
26642,
26875,
62
],
[
26875,
26972,
63
],
[
26972,
27135,
64
],
[
27135,
27495,
65
],
[
27495,
28431,
66
],
[
28431,
28679,
67
],
[
28679,
29000,
68
],
[
29000,
29154,
69
],
[
29154,
29328,
70
],
[
29328,
29531,
71
],
[
29531,
29743,
72
],
[
29743,
30486,
73
],
[
30486,
31344,
74
],
[
31344,
31437,
75
],
[
31437,
32653,
76
],
[
32653,
32814,
77
],
[
32814,
33509,
78
],
[
33509,
35225,
79
],
[
35225,
36147,
80
],
[
36147,
36727,
81
],
[
36727,
37277,
82
],
[
37277,
37369,
83
],
[
37369,
37897,
84
],
[
37897,
38017,
85
],
[
38017,
39343,
86
],
[
39343,
39563,
87
],
[
39563,
40505,
88
],
[
40505,
40944,
89
],
[
40944,
41386,
90
],
[
41386,
41642,
91
],
[
41642,
41975,
92
],
[
41975,
42437,
93
],
[
42437,
43062,
94
],
[
43062,
43152,
95
],
[
43152,
44410,
96
],
[
44410,
44492,
97
],
[
44492,
45670,
98
],
[
45670,
45763,
99
],
[
45763,
46551,
100
],
[
46551,
46641,
101
],
[
46641,
47273,
102
],
[
47273,
47565,
103
],
[
47565,
47864,
104
],
[
47864,
48145,
105
],
[
48145,
49118,
106
],
[
49118,
49572,
107
],
[
49572,
49897,
108
],
[
49897,
49947,
109
],
[
49947,
50274,
110
],
[
50274,
50995,
111
],
[
50995,
51213,
112
],
[
51213,
51462,
113
],
[
51462,
51783,
114
],
[
51783,
52002,
115
],
[
52002,
52555,
116
],
[
52555,
52805,
117
],
[
52805,
53622,
118
],
[
53622,
53699,
119
],
[
53699,
53742,
120
],
[
53742,
53948,
121
],
[
53948,
54003,
122
],
[
54003,
54447,
123
],
[
54447,
54545,
124
],
[
54545,
54977,
125
],
[
54977,
55052,
126
],
[
55052,
55273,
127
],
[
55273,
55356,
128
],
[
55356,
55822,
129
],
[
55822,
56119,
130
],
[
56119,
56372,
131
],
[
56372,
56606,
132
],
[
56606,
56677,
133
],
[
56677,
58012,
134
],
[
58012,
59102,
135
],
[
59102,
60302,
136
],
[
60302,
60911,
137
],
[
60911,
61013,
138
],
[
61013,
61741,
139
],
[
61741,
61824,
140
],
[
61824,
62483,
141
],
[
62483,
63471,
142
],
[
63471,
65186,
143
],
[
65186,
65981,
144
],
[
65981,
66047,
145
],
[
66047,
66124,
146
],
[
66124,
66198,
147
],
[
66198,
66240,
148
],
[
66240,
66306,
149
],
[
66306,
66383,
150
],
[
66383,
66447,
151
],
[
66447,
66522,
152
],
[
66522,
66585,
153
],
[
66585,
66659,
154
],
[
66659,
66722,
155
],
[
66722,
66793,
156
],
[
66793,
66890,
157
],
[
66890,
66998,
158
],
[
66998,
67096,
159
],
[
67096,
67548,
160
],
[
67548,
67646,
161
],
[
67646,
67989,
162
],
[
67989,
68061,
163
],
[
68061,
68144,
164
],
[
68144,
68208,
165
],
[
68208,
68666,
166
],
[
68666,
68736,
167
],
[
68736,
68817,
168
],
[
68817,
68840,
169
],
[
68840,
69901,
170
],
[
69901,
70699,
171
],
[
70699,
71146,
172
],
[
71146,
71402,
173
],
[
71402,
72835,
174
],
[
72835,
73494,
175
],
[
73494,
73494,
176
],
[
73494,
74472,
177
],
[
74472,
75420,
178
],
[
75420,
75535,
179
]
]
} |
93aa2cf9d9da612ad97b92a6dfe74157224151cd | China and conflict-affected states Between principle and pragmatism
Ivan Campbell January 2012 The Nepal case study is excerpted from a full-length report published by Saferworld that focuses upon China’s role in three conflict-affected contexts: Sri Lanka, Nepal and South Sudan – Sudan.
Acknowledgements
The case study was researched and written for Saferworld by Ivan Campbell. We are grateful for advice and feedback from the Saferworld country team in Nepal. For their time and comments, special thanks also go to Nishchal Pandey and Martin Stuerzinger. The report was copy-edited by Deepthi Wickremasinghe and designed by Jane Stevenson. Saferworld is grateful to the United Kingdom Department for International Development for providing financial support for this project.
© Saferworld January 2012. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without full attribution. Saferworld welcomes and encourage the utilisation and dissemination of the material included in this publication.
Acronyms: Nepal
| Acronym | Description | |---------|-------------| | APECF | Asia Pacific Exchange and Cooperation Foundation | | BRICS | Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa | | BSOS | Building Stability Overseas Strategy | | CoAS | Chief of Army Staff | | CPA | Comprehensive Peace Agreement | | CPC | Communist Party of China | | CPN-UML | Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist | | CSC | China Study Centre | | DFID | UK Department for International Development | | GoN | Government of Nepal | | ICG | International Crisis Group | | INGO | International non-governmental organisation | | NGO | Non-governmental organisation | | NR | Nepal Rupees | | PLA | People’s Liberation Army | | RMB | Renminbi | | SAARC | South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation | | TAR | Tibetan Autonomous Region | | UCPN-M | United Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist | | UK | United Kingdom | | UNIDO | United Nations Industrial Development Organization | | UNMIN | United Nations Mission in Nepal | | US | United States | This map is intended for illustrative purposes only. Saferworld takes no position on whether this representation is legally or politically valid. 4 Nepal case study
4.1 Introduction
This case study examines China’s involvement in Nepal. Nepal suffered from a decade-long war that ended in 2006. Since the end of the war China has significantly increased its engagement in the country through a variety of means. At the same time there has been considerable international investment in post-conflict peacebuilding and development. However, Nepal continues to experience political instability and low-level insecurity, so building peace and stability remains a priority.
The aim of the research was to test the hypothesis that China’s increasing engagement will have a significant effect on peace and stability in Nepal, and to consider what the implications are for policy actors in China, as well as in the West. It explores how China’s engagement in Nepal may affect identified conflict drivers and dynamics, both directly and indirectly. This is considered in the context of wider regional and international relations, with particular reference to the role of India.
The case study presents the findings of research and analysis conducted by Saferworld between April and October 2011. The in-country research took the form of interviews with a range of stakeholders in Kathmandu in May 2011. Interviewees included Nepali politicians, current and former diplomats, military officials, business people, journalists and non-governmental organisations (NGOs). Interviews were also conducted in Nepal with foreign embassy officials, representatives of multilateral agencies, international NGOs (INGOs) and think tanks. Interviews were complemented by desk-based information-gathering and literature review.
The case study is structured in seven sections. The Background provides a brief overview of the current context, including an assessment of conflict drivers and regional dynamics. This is followed by an examination of the extent and nature of China’s involvement in Nepal, looking at a broad spectrum of engagement including economic, military and diplomatic. There is then an analysis of the mix of foreign policy principles and context-specific interests that motivate China’s engagement. The role of other major international players in Nepal, notably India, is also considered. Based on this, the study explores the impact that China’s increasing engagement is likely to have upon conflict issues in Nepal; both directly and as it may affect the engagement of other actors. The case study concludes with options for policy makers to respond proactively to China’s growing role in Nepal. 4.2 Background
Post-war Nepal
Nepal is a small country wedged between the rising powers of China and India. It was ruled as an absolute monarchy until 1990, when it became a parliamentary democracy with the monarch as head of state. In 1996 the United Communist Party of Nepal-Maoist (UCPN-M, hereafter referred to as ‘the Maoists’) launched a ‘People’s War’, fuelled by a widespread feeling of marginalisation among the rural population, which sought to replace the monarch with a communist regime. The decade of violent conflict that followed claimed the lives of between 13,000 and 17,000 Nepalis and displaced over 70,000.
The war ended in 2006 with the signing of the Comprehensive Peace Agreement (CPA) between the Maoists and the main political parties. The 2008 elections resulted in an overwhelming victory for the Maoists, who won a majority of parliamentary seats. The leader of the Maoist insurgency, Prachanda, was appointed Prime Minister and in the same year Nepal declared itself a Republic and started drafting a new Constitution.
Despite the signing of a peace agreement between the main political actors, sustainable peace has yet to be established in Nepal and insecurity and political instability persist. Prachanda was in power for less than a year, followed by a lengthy period of institutional paralysis under an unwieldy 22-party coalition. There were then seven months of political deadlock when no party was able to attain majority support and there were 16 unsuccessful votes to elect a Prime Minister. This stalemate was finally broken in February 2011 when a compromise between the Maoists and the Communist Party of Nepal-Unified Marxist Leninist (CPN-UML) paved the way for a coalition government. But this government in turn collapsed in August 2011 when the CPN-UML Prime Minister resigned, leading to the formation of a new government under a Maoist Prime Minister, Baburam Bhattarai.
When one considers the scale of change aspired to in Nepal, such political instability is not surprising. During the past five years, the country has been undergoing a profound shift as it seeks to transform itself from a Hindu monarchy to a secular, multi-party republic. There have been a number of stumbling blocks in this process and occasional outbreaks of violence, but there have also been significant achievements. These include bringing the leaders of the Maoist insurgency into Nepal’s political system and holding elections that have been conducted relatively freely and peacefully.
The integration of Maoist combatants into the national army – one of the key commitments in the CPA – has been more problematic. The role and composition of the Nepalese Army is a highly contentious issue and there has been intense and protracted debate over how many Maoists would be integrated into the Nepalese Army. Some Maoists originally wanted all of the estimated 19,000 former combatants integrated, while other parties felt this was far too many. In November 2011 there was an apparent breakthrough with a cross-party agreement that about one-third of the combatants would be integrated into the security forces, with the remainder receiving a pay-off and returning to civilian life. The other key CPA commitment is to draft a new constitution. This too has proved a contentious and protracted process, especially because of the implications of the proposed federal structure.
As Nepal’s political parties wrestle for control of the government, progress on these two key provisions of the CPA has largely stalled. As a consequence, it has not yet been possible to lay solid foundations for sustainable peace and development in Nepal. The country has effectively been in a transition process since 2006, and there is a fear that it may be stuck in an “endless transition period”, during which it will remain vulnerable to the return of widespread violent conflict.1
1 Saferworld interview, Kathmandu, May 2011. Conflict issues
In addition to the legacy of the ten-year war and chronic political instability, there are a number of other factors that fuel insecurity and compound the sense of Nepal’s fragility. Poverty is the most pervasive factor since Nepal is one of the poorest countries in the world. Over half of its 30 million people live on less than US$1.25 a day, and much of the adult population is unemployed. Nepal also ranks very low relative to other countries in terms of human development indicators, such as life expectancy and literacy. The recent history of violence and instability has undermined the economy, with Western businesses apprehensive about ongoing political instability and reluctant to invest. High levels of corruption are a further disincentive, with Nepal ranked 146 out of 178 countries in the 2010 Corruption Perception Index.
Nepali society is characterised by multiple identities. It is an extremely diverse country in terms of ethnicity, culture and language, with over 100 different ethnic groups. Added to this is the entrenched hierarchy of the caste system. High rates of inequality co-exist with the high level of poverty, and are linked to geographic region, gender, caste and ethnicity. These inequalities were one of the root causes of the formation and success of the Maoist insurgency and they continue to provoke low-level conflict across Nepal. As noted in a previous Saferworld conflict analysis, since the end of the war there has been an increasing focus on the reasons behind political and economic exclusion in Nepal. Some suggest that conflict drivers are now identity-based rather than ideological as diverse groups claim equal representation and access to resources from the state; although others question whether conflict in Nepal was ever really driven by ideology.
The most evident regional cleavage in Nepal is between the Madhes people of the Terai – the lowlands that span the southern border with India – and the ‘hill people’ of Kathmandu and the middle swathe of the country. The Terai region is home to almost half of the country’s population, with the Madhesi predominant. They seek autonomy for their region in reaction to perceived marginalisation from state institutions and domination by the ‘hill people’. This gives added significance to the new constitution and the question of how a federal structure will address Madhesi grievances and aspirations. Inter-communal tensions in the Terai have increased in recent years, and regularly spill over into violence. A number of armed groups have emerged to promote the Madhesi cause – although the line between political and criminal violence is often blurred. The Madhesi communities are culturally and ethnically close to peoples of northern India, leading to suspicions that Hindu radicals may be fomenting violence in the Terai.
In terms of international profile and attention, the identity issue most associated with Nepal is that of the Tibetan people. After the Chinese annexation of Tibet in 1951, Nepal became a haven for Tibetans who refused to accept Chinese occupation. In recent decades a stream of Tibetan asylum-seekers has crossed the Himalayan mountain range to escape perceived persecution and has sought refuge in Nepal. There are currently between 20,000 and 25,000 Tibetans living in the country. They have a cultural and religious affinity with the people of Nepal and are generally well assimilated into the local population. Nepal also plays a key role as a transit point for asylum-seekers on their way to Dharamsala in India and beyond.
______________________________________________________________________
2 Vaughn B, Nepal: Political developments and bilateral relations with the United States, (Congressional Research Service, April 2011). 3 United Nations Development Program (UNDP), Human development report 2010: Nepal country fact sheet (2010). 4 Nepal ranks 134th on FDI inflow index, Kathmandu Post, 28 July 2011, www.istockanalyst.com/business/news/5325051/nepal-ranks-134th-on-fdi-inflow-index, accessed 26 October 2011. 5 Transparency International, ‘Corruption perceptions index 2010 Results’, www.transparency.org/policy_research/surveys_indices/cpi/2010/results, accessed 26 October 2011. 6 Op cit UNDP. 7 Scawen C, Conflict analysis of Nepal, (Saferworld, 2008), unpublished. 8 Saferworld interviews, Kathmandu, May 2011. 9 Preliminary report of Nepal’s national population census 2011, cited in: ‘Nepal’s population is 26,620,809’, Republica, 27 September 2011, myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=48575, accessed 26 October 2011. 10 Interdisciplinary Analysts, Nepal Madhes Foundation, Small Arms Survey and Saferworld, Armed violence in the Terai (August 2011). 11 Saferworld interview, Kathmandu, May 2011. Regional dynamics
Nepal’s role as a bridge between China and India for Tibetan refugees highlights the country’s strategic location between its two giant neighbours. The political and security situation within Nepal cannot be understood without reference to the relationship between India and China. There is an oft-quoted metaphor attributed to an 18th Century Nepali king that describes Nepal as “a delicate yam between two boulders”. This aptly describes the country’s potentially vulnerable position between the two great regional, and increasingly global, powers of India and China.
Given Nepal’s size and land-locked location, the fact that its powerful neighbours have a major interest in its affairs – potentially squeezing it between them – is no great surprise. However, the country also has geostrategic significance as a buffer between the two main power-brokers in the region. For India, the Himalayan mountains represent the principal land barrier between China and the resource-rich Ganges plain. After the Chinese occupation of Tibet, Nepal became the main Himalayan buffer-state for India. Thus New Delhi has long regarded Nepal as an integral part of India’s sphere of influence, and developments in Nepal are seen as closely linked to India’s own security.
Indian policy towards Nepal has focused on forging strong links in the security, political and economic arenas. This ‘special relationship’ was enshrined in the 1950 ‘Treaty of Peace and Friendship’ between the two countries. This granted Nepal a range of preferential economic agreements with India in return for New Delhi achieving its security objectives, including control over Nepali arms acquisitions. The Treaty also granted nationals of both countries reciprocal rights with regard to residence, property and trade. Today people and goods are able to flow relatively freely across the India-Nepal border, and generations of the Nepali elite have been educated in India. These connections have sustained the close historical links between the people of India and Nepal, based on a shared religion, as well as ethnic, linguistic and cultural affinity.
Despite the predominant role played by India, China too has a long history of engagement with Nepal. It has been providing some degree of economic aid to Nepal since the 1950s, and in 1960 Beijing and Kathmandu signed their own ‘Treaty of Peace and Friendship’. For the most part Beijing appears to have accepted that Nepal is within India’s sphere of influence and has respected New Delhi’s primacy. However, when tensions between the two regional powers came to the fore in the Sino-Indian war of 1962, Nepal was caught in the middle. China presented itself as a benevolent power in contrast to the superior attitude of India towards its smaller neighbours. Beijing subsequently supported Kathmandu in disputes with New Delhi on trade issues, using propaganda in Nepal to fuel nationalist feeling and anti-India sentiments.
The limitations of China’s ability to support Nepal were exposed in 1988 when the Nepali king signed an agreement for the supply of anti-aircraft guns from Beijing. This provoked a fierce response from New Delhi, which imposed an economic blockade on Nepal from 1989 to 1990 and closed down most of the transit points on the border, with devastating consequences for Nepal’s economy. This highlighted the link between India’s security interests and its economic relations with Nepal, as well as demonstrating that China was not then in a position to supplant India from its dominant role vis-à-vis Nepal.
The above episode also illustrates Kathmandu’s limited room for manoeuvre in designing its foreign policy. It realised it could not afford to antagonise New Delhi by too close a friendship with Beijing, but equally to go too far the other way could jeopardise its relations with China. Hence Nepal’s foreign policy has been characterised by the attempt to balance its association with both sides. As long as India and China are... locked in competition to extend their power and influence in South Asia, Kathmandu will have to tread carefully. Thus the geopolitical competition between India and China and its implications for regional security loom over Nepal.
From this summary of the post-conflict context, current conflict issues and the wider regional dynamics, it is clear that peace in Nepal cannot yet be considered as secure and sustainable. Since the end of the war in 2006, there has been considerable progress in certain areas of political development, but some key issues remain unresolved. As a consequence, the conditions for a return to violent conflict remain. It is against this backdrop that we next consider the nature and extent of China's engagement in Nepal.
4.3 China's engagement in Nepal
China has significantly increased its engagement in Nepal since the signing of the CPA in 2006, with a particularly marked increase in 2011. China's engagement in Nepal takes a variety of forms: economic investment, trade, aid, infrastructural development, military assistance, diplomatic exchanges, as well as cultural and educational initiatives.
Economic
As one would expect given its history, India is the most significant external economic actor in Nepal; however, China is rapidly increasing the level of its engagement. Historically India has been the top investor in Nepal, followed by the United States (US) and China. In 2009 India contributed about 38 percent of total foreign investment in Nepal, while China's share was around 11 percent. However, there are a growing number of Chinese companies seeking to do business in Nepal, evidenced by the fact that in the past two years the number of Chinese investors registering to set up new joint ventures has outstripped the number of new Indian investors.
In terms of trade, India is Nepal's main trading partner and accounted for just over half of all of Nepal's trade in 2010. However, in April 2009 a Memorandum of Understanding was signed between the governments of China and Nepal in order to promote bilateral trade and investment in areas of mutual interest. Trade relations between the two countries have grown fast since then, with China's share increasing from 11 percent of all trade with Nepal in 2009 to 19.4 percent in 2010. Chinese products are now ubiquitous throughout Nepal, and are generally regarded by Nepalis as being cheap, but of good quality, in contrast to their Indian equivalents.
China has also dramatically increased its aid to Nepal in recent years. It is difficult to obtain comprehensive and verifiable figures, but based on official Government of Nepal (GoN) statistics, it is possible to trace a steady increase in Chinese aid to Nepal from 10 million Nepal Rupees (NR) (US$128,200) in fiscal year 2005/6 to NR 2.55 billion (US$32.5 million) in 2010/11. The increase in 2011 is particularly notable: China had reportedly pledged loans and grants worth more than NR 10 billion (US$127.4 million) by August 2011. This included a sizeable concessional loan for the Trishuli hydro- power construction and US$19 million for assistance to the Nepal Army. When a high-ranking Chinese delegation visited Kathmandu in August, they signed an additional US$50 million economic and technical co-operation agreement, including a loan for a hydropower transmission line and US$2.5 million to strengthen the capacities of the Nepal Police.
With this huge surge in Chinese finance in 2011, China now reportedly figures in the list of Nepal’s top five development partners. This dramatic increase should be qualified however by recognition that approximately three-quarters of China’s ‘aid’ to Nepal comes in the form of loans rather than as direct grants. Furthermore, all Chinese aid projects are awarded to Chinese contractors. Although Chinese companies can and often do then sub-contract to local Nepali companies, most of the skilled labourers employed are Chinese, as are the materials used. As a consequence, new employment and procurement opportunities for Nepalis are limited. It is important to note however that some Western donors only recently stopped the same practice of ‘tied aid’, while others continue to do so.
Infrastructure
The history of Chinese road-building in Nepal goes back 40 years and has been instrumental in fostering a favourable perception of China among the Nepali people. China has the technological capability to develop high-altitude transport infrastructure, both road and rail links, in the Himalayan region, and this has made many remote and mountainous areas of Nepal more accessible. In 2008 China and Nepal announced plans to connect the Tibet Autonomous Region with Nepal through a 770 km rail-link between Lhasa and the Nepali border town of Khasa. This is an immensely costly (US$1.9 billion) and long-term project, which is not expected to be completed before 2013. Nevertheless, the extension of the railway line from Lhasa to the Nepali border, and potentially beyond, is regarded as a real ‘game-changer’ in terms of trade relations and geo-politics in the region.
Historically the Himalayan wall has proved a major obstacle to trade and connectivity between China and South Asia. Nepal is land-locked and highly dependent upon Kolkata port in India for both export and import. At present Nepal faces several bottlenecks in its trade and energy supply chains due to poor infrastructure in Nepal and the poor efficiency of Indian ports, which add to the costs of trade. However, when completed, the Lhasa-Khasa rail-link will increase Nepal’s options. It will reduce Nepal’s dependence on India for its regional and international trade, while helping to boost trade with China. Nepal could also potentially become a land gateway for Chinese trade and commerce with South Asian markets. The southern expansion of China’s rail networks may cause concern in Indian security circles however, given the suspicion that Chinese infrastructure projects will serve military as well as civilian purposes. It is suggested that the new rail-link would enable the rapid deployment (within 24 hours) of Chinese forces to India’s borders.
Besides the construction of the railway connecting Lhasa to the Nepali border, China is involved in several other major transport projects in Nepal, such as the expansion of the Kathmandu ring road and the development of a dry port at Tatopani near the border with Tibet. China has also stated that it will support the construction of new Nepali border posts along this border. In addition, the sizeable loans in 2011 for the development of Nepal’s hydropower signal China’s intent to tap into this resource.
25 Op cit Humagain. 26 Op cit GoN MOF 2010. 27 Saferworld interview, Kathmandu, May 2011. 28 Pandey N, ‘Developing infrastructure connectivity between India and China through Nepal’, nepalnews.com, www.nepalnews.com/archive/2011/other/guestcolumn/20110628/guest_columns_01.php, accessed 26 October 2011. 29 Sakhuja V, ‘China’s strategic advantage in Nepal’, China Brief (June 2011), vol 11 no 11. 30 Kumar A, ‘The danger from China’s border infrastructure’, Observer Research Foundation, March 2011, Analysis, 4, www.observerindia.com/cms/export/foronline/modules/analysis/attachments/The_danger_from_China_border_infrastructure_1267876993069.pdf, accessed 26 October 2011. 31 Saferworld interview, Kathmandu, May 2011. The potential power generation from hydroelectricity in Nepal is estimated at 83,000 megawatts, although previous initiatives to develop this resource have foundered. Alongside official assistance for infrastructure development, Chinese companies have also made significant inroads into Nepal, especially in the area of telecommunications, where the companies ZTE and Huawei have secured major contracts from the state-controlled Nepal Telecom.
**Military**
Since 2006 many of Nepal’s traditional institutions have either collapsed or been superseded. The Nepalese Army remains and is regarded by many as the most stable and reliable national institution in the country. Historically the Indian and Nepalese armies have had a very close relationship, such that Indian officers are honorary officers in the Nepalese Army and vice-versa. India is also the biggest provider of military assistance to Nepal. However, it stopped supplying arms to the Nepalese Army after King Gyanendra seized power in 2005, which led to a cooling of relations between the two militaries. This opened some space for China to develop relations with the Nepalese Army. In recent years the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Nepalese Army have established a military assistance programme, including the supply of non-lethal equipment, training, infrastructure development and the exchange of high-level delegations.
The growing relationship between the armies of China and Nepal was symbolised by the visit in March 2011 of General Chen Bingde, Chief of General Staff of the PLA – the highest-level military visit from China to Nepal for over a decade. General Chen met with the Nepali Prime Minister and President, as well as with the Chief of Army Staff of the Nepalese Army (CoAS). He announced a military assistance package worth US$17 million from the PLA to the Nepalese Army, with assurances of more support to come. This was followed by a reciprocal visit by the CoAS to Beijing in November 2011, when an initial agreement worth US$7.7 million was signed between the two army chiefs. The aid will mostly be used to modernise the Birendra Military Hospital. The total assistance pledged represents a substantial increase in China’s military aid to Nepal, although India remains by some distance the largest provider of military assistance, pledging US$55 million in 2009 alone.
It is notable that the military assistance deals between China and Nepal were not signed between the governments, but between the respective military chiefs. According to an analyst in Kathmandu, “Beijing would rather deal direct with the Nepalese Army than with the government”, and this reflects the perceived status and stability of Nepal’s army relative to the government. It is claimed that Beijing also wanted to establish a relationship whereby Chinese and Nepali officers have reciprocal rank, akin to that between India and Nepal, but this was purportedly blocked by New Delhi. Meanwhile, there are persistent rumours about the Chinese military also having developed links with Nepal’s Maoist army. Although these are not substantiated, seeking to build relations and confidence with both of the major armed forces in Nepal would reflect a typically pragmatic approach.
**Diplomatic**
The increase in Chinese economic and military engagement in Nepal has its corollary in the upgrading of diplomatic relations between the two countries. The appointment in June 2011 of Yang Houlan as Ambassador to Nepal, a high-profile regional security expert and former Ambassador to Afghanistan, was widely viewed as a sign of Nepal's growing strategic importance for China.\\textsuperscript{39} Further evidence can be seen in the proliferation of diplomatic exchanges between the two countries. In 2011, a series of delegations of senior Nepali officials from the Ministries of Home Affairs and of Defence, from the Nepal Police and the Army all visited China for consultations and training. In August 2011 it was reported that there were three different delegations in China from the Home Ministry alone, amounting to a total of 50 officials on a so-called “China junket”.\\textsuperscript{40}
As well as government officials, Beijing has invited delegations from all of Nepal's major political parties to visit China. In June 2011, a delegation of leaders of the Maoist and the CPN-UML parties visited Beijing at the invitation of the Communist Party of China (CPC). The leadership of the Nepali Congress party was also invited to Beijing but declined the offer, claiming that it was not appropriate to leave the country at the time.\\textsuperscript{41} More recently, Beijing has been trying to extend its reach to the political parties representing the Madhesi communities of the Terai.
In return, there have been an increasing number of visits by senior Chinese officials to Kathmandu. In August 2011 Zhou Yongkang travelled to Nepal at the head of a 60-strong delegation from Beijing. Zhou is a high-ranking member of the powerful Politburo Standing Committee of the CPC and is the most senior Chinese official to visit Nepal since 2006. Zhou put forward a five-point proposal to enhance ties between the two countries, which included: more high-level exchange visits; Chinese investment in a variety of sectors, including business, infrastructure, tourism and water resources; Chinese support for security in Nepal; people-to-people contacts and cultural exchanges; co-operation between political parties; and joint efforts to tackle food insecurity, climate change and the global economic recession.\\textsuperscript{42}
As mentioned in Zhou Yongkang's five-point proposal, there are also less tangible aspects of China's engagement in Nepal, such as cultural and educational exchanges. These aspects of China's engagement are often referred to as ‘soft power’ in contrast to the economic assistance, infrastructure and hardware that Beijing also provides. The significance of this aspect of China's engagement was explicitly recognised in Zhou Yongkang's proposal to boost people-to-people exchanges between the two countries in order to reinforce the foundation for bilateral friendship.\\textsuperscript{43} Beijing is well-aware of the deep-rooted Indian cultural influence in Nepal and it is widely perceived to be deploying soft power in an attempt to counter-balance and dilute India's influence.
There are various vehicles for this sort of people-to-people exchange. A number of China Study Centres (CSCs) have been established in Nepal in order to promote cultural and language exchange with the Nepali people. Reportedly, “thirty-three CSCs have been established in southern Nepal adjoining the Indian border”.\\textsuperscript{44} In 2007 a Confucius Institute was established at Kathmandu University, where nearly 1,000 Nepali students now learn Chinese. Meanwhile, Beijing also provides scholarships to Nepalis to study in China, where there are a growing number of Nepali students.
\\textsuperscript{39} Pandey L, ‘Security expert China’s Nepal envoy’, Himalayan Times, 28 May 2011, www.thehimalayantimes.com/fullTodays.php?headline=Security+expert+China%26acute%3Bs+Nepal+envoy+&NewsID=289591, accessed 26 October 2011.
\\textsuperscript{40} ‘Nepal home ministry sans officials: China junket in full swing’, Telegraph Nepal, 31 August 2011, www.telegraphnepal.com/headline/2011-08-31/nepal-home-ministry-sans-officials:-china-junket-in-full-swing, accessed 26 October 2011.
\\textsuperscript{41} ‘A dozen Nepal communists heading to China: all roads now lead to Beijing’, Telegraph Nepal, 19 June 2011, www.telegraphnepal.com/headline/2011-06-19/a-dozen-nepal-communists-heading-to-china-all-roads-now-lead-to-beijing, accessed 26 October 2011.
\\textsuperscript{42} ‘China warns against foreign play in Nepal, forwards five point proposal’, Telegraph Nepal, 18 August 2011, www.telegraphnepal.com/headline/2011-08-18/china-warns-against-foreign-play-in-nepal-forwards-five-point-proposal, accessed 26 October 2011.
\\textsuperscript{43} ‘Senior Chinese official outlines proposal to boost China-Nepal ties’, Xinhua, 18 August 2011, www.gov.cn/english/2011-08/18/content_1927679.htm, accessed 28 October 2011.
\\textsuperscript{44} Bhattacharya A, ‘China’s inroads into Nepal: India’s concerns’, Institute for Defence Studies and Analyses (IDSA) Comment, 18 May 2009, www.idsa.in/strategiccomments/ChinaInroadsintoNepal_ALBhattacharya_180509, accessed 28 October 2011. Another facet of China’s soft power is radio broadcasting, with a branch of China Radio International set up in Kathmandu in 2010, including a Nepali service to teach the Chinese language.(^{45})
A further dimension of soft power is tourism. China and Nepal’s tourism ministries have been working together to increase tourist numbers to Nepal; for instance by Beijing designating Nepal an authorised tourist destination (the ninth country to be thus recognised), and by Kathmandu waiving visa fees for Chinese visitors. This has contributed to a rapid growth in the number of Chinese tourists, so that by 2010 there were almost as many tourists coming from China as from the US or United Kingdom (UK) (who have the second and third highest number of tourists); though it is still a long way behind the number of visitors from India.(^{46}) With increasing Chinese investment in infrastructure and construction, there is also potential for Chinese investors to make inroads into Nepal’s tourism market, which is yet to be fully tapped by the Nepali government.(^{47})
There are limits to the efficacy of soft power however, and the controversy over the Lumbini development project may serve as a cautionary tale for Beijing. This was a vast project worth US$3.0 billion aimed at transforming the town of Lumbini, the Buddha’s birth-place, into a key pilgrimage destination for Buddhists from around the world. It was proposed to build an airport, a highway, hotels, a convention centre, temples and a Buddhist university. However, the initiative also appeared to be strategically aimed at reducing the influence of the Dalai Lama and his followers by creating a focal point for Buddhism that was free from Tibetan influence.
The Lumbini project involved a diverse cast of characters, including Prachanda and the former Crown Prince of Nepal, and it was supposedly a partnership between the Hong Kong-based Asia Pacific Exchange and Cooperation Foundation (APECF) and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO). It collapsed however after UNIDO and others reported to be backing the project made clear that they had no involvement. The official word from Beijing was that the Chinese Government had no hand in the initiative.(^{48}) However, APECF is based in China and regarded as a quasi-official NGO, which suggests that the Lumbini project was at least endorsed by Beijing. As The Economist concludes, “If this was an exercise in Chinese ‘soft power’ it was a disaster”.(^{49}) Nevertheless, while this particular initiative foundered, it may signal the shape of things to come. Prachanda was due to meet with UN Secretary-General, Ban Ki-Moon, in New York regarding the development of Lumbini, and plans to develop the site as the “Buddhist equivalent to the Vatican” continue.(^{50})
China does not have a development agenda per se that is comparable to that of Western donors, but its engagement in Nepal and other developing countries is based on a number of core principles. These principles reflect China’s own development experience and history of engagement with other states. A central principle that guides much of China’s foreign policy is that of respecting the sovereignty of all states. China’s position is that it will not intervene or seek to influence the domestic affairs of any country since these are the exclusive concern of the national government. This is generally referred to as China’s policy of ‘non-interference’. Thus, when the current Chinese Ambassador
______________________________________________________________________
(^{45}) ‘China Radio International launches Confucius class in Nepali capital’, China Daily, 30 June 2010, www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2010-06/30/content_10042253.htm, accessed 28 October 2011.
(^{46}) ‘China eyes Nepal as next investment destination’, Ekantipur, 17 September 2010, www.ekantipur.com/2010/09/17/top-story/china-eyes-nepal-as-next-investment-destination/322345/, accessed 28 October 2011.
(^{47}) Saferworld interview, Kathmandu, May 2011.
(^{48}) Saferworld interviews, Beijing, July 2011.
(^{49}) ‘At Buddha’s birthplace: A Chinese development proposal causes disbelief’, The Economist, 20 August 2011, www.economist.com/node/21526389, accessed 28 October 2011.
(^{50}) ‘Dahal-led Lumbini dev committee to visit NY’, Republica, 26 October 2011, www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=37584, accessed 5 November 2011; see also: ‘Lumbini development committee holds first meet’, The Himalayan, 21 October 2011, www.thehimalayantimes.com/node/306512, accessed 5 November 2011. in Kathmandu took up his post, he reassured Nepal that “China will never deviate from its policy of non-interference in the internal matters of Nepal”. Following from this, China’s position is that the support it gives to developing countries is not conditional on political or economic reforms, improvements in governance or the protection of human rights – a position which clearly differs from that of many Western donors.
In addition to the importance it ascribes to sovereignty and non-interference, another key principle of China’s engagement in developing countries is that of mutual benefit. China is not squeamish about advancing its economic self-interest at the same time as contributing to the development of other countries. It is open about the economic rationale for its engagement in the developing world. An important driver is the so-called ‘Going Out’ policy, which aims to sustain high levels of economic growth within China through global engagement, especially in new developing country markets such as Nepal.
In addition to these general principles that underpin China’s relations with developing countries, its engagement in Nepal is informed by a variety of context-specific interests and motives. In this section of the paper we explore three main areas of China’s interest in Nepal: stability, economic development and geopolitics.
**Stability**
China’s engagement with Nepal is strongly shaped by the ‘One China’ policy. This refers to China’s own sovereignty and territorial claims, which are primarily concerned with denying official recognition to Taiwan and to claiming Tibet – officially the Tibetan Autonomous Region (TAR) – as an integral part of China. Beijing considers Tibet part of its territory, and the region is also a key source of mineral and water resources for China’s development. Tibet is one of China’s so-called ‘core interests’, which essentially means that it is not open to negotiation and China will use all means necessary to protect it. Therefore any challenge to China’s sovereignty over Tibet or claims for Tibetan independence are regarded by Beijing as serious threats to China’s security and territorial integrity.
China’s occupation of Tibet in the 1950s increased the strategic importance of Nepal since it is the main country bordering Tibet. As described above, since the occupation, Nepal has been a haven for Tibetans who wished to escape Beijing’s rule and it is also a transit point for Tibetan refugees seeking asylum in India and the West. China is determined that Nepal should not become a breeding ground for activists campaigning for an independent Tibet. It fears that Tibetan refugees, who enjoy considerable sympathy and support in India and the West, will use Nepal as a base to protest against the Chinese occupation and to carry out ‘anti-China activities’. Recent events in Xinjiang, Inner Mongolia and within the TAR add to Beijing’s concerns that disturbances on its periphery could fuel unrest nearer to home.
In response to the perceived threat to China’s security and territorial integrity, Beijing pursues a policy of repression against Tibetan activists. In order to implement this policy in Nepal it requires a relatively stable regime and an ‘effective’ security apparatus. It also requires a compliant government that will co-operate in the control of Tibetan activists. Therefore Beijing’s primary objective in Nepal has been to ensure Kathmandu’s recognition of the One China policy and to secure its co-operation to suppress Tibetan activists. There is a perception in Kathmandu that Beijing uses its diplomatic and economic leverage over the GoN to ensure that the authorities co-operate in achieving this objective.
______________________________________________________________________
51 Singh B, ‘China’s Nepal focus’, Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, 14 July 2011, www.ipcs.org/article/india/chinas-nepal-focus-3431.html, accessed 28 October 2011. 52 ‘Tibet’, GlobalSecurity.org, www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/war/tibet.htm, accessed 28 October 2011. 53 Op cit Dabhade and Pant. 54 Saferworld interviews, Kathmandu, May 2011. This was most evident in the run-up to the 2008 Beijing Olympics when for four months there were protests by Tibetans in Nepal under the slogan of ‘Free Tibet’ or ‘Save Tibet’. The Chinese Ambassador demanded that, “the Nepali establishment take severe penal actions against those involved in anti-China activities in Nepal”. There followed a crackdown by the Nepali security forces against Tibetan refugees, which resulted in over 8,000 arrests between March and July 2008. The Nepali police were accused of violations of human rights, including excessive use of force, arbitrary detention and unlawful threats to deport Tibetans to China.
The Nepali Government’s policy of clamping down on Tibetan activists appears to have strengthened in recent years, as economic and other forms of support from China have increased. According to Tibetan sources, Nepal’s police now help the Chinese authorities prevent Tibetans from fleeing across the border, reducing the flow of refugees into Nepal from more than 2,000 per year before 2008 to 770 last year. Nepal has also forcibly returned refugees to China, and Chinese police have reportedly entered Nepal to search for fleeing Tibetans. Meanwhile, human rights monitors have criticised Nepal for arresting Tibetans who publicly celebrated the Dalai Lama’s birthday and for preventing Tibetans from voting in the 2010 elections for the leader of Tibetans in exile.
These actions by the Nepali authorities have their corollary in the regular declarations by Chinese and Nepali officials denouncing ‘anti-China activities’. Successive Nepali governments have consistently stated that such activities will not be allowed on Nepali soil and have vowed to prevent Tibetan demonstrations; a message echoed by other political party leaders. One of the first public statements by the new Chinese Ambassador in June 2011 was to express his concern about growing anti-China activities in Nepal. In response the Nepali Prime Minister reaffirmed his Government’s commitment to the One China policy. Likewise, Zhou Yongkang in August 2011 expressed the hope that “Nepal would continue to prevent Tibetan separatists from using Nepali soil to act against China”. This prompted Jhalanath Khanal, the outgoing Prime Minister, to pledge “that the Government will not allow any anti-China activities.”
The words and actions of the Nepali authorities suggest that China has successfully managed to bring pressure to bear on the GoN to ensure the suppression of Tibetan activism within Nepal. Furthermore, there appears to be increasing co-operation between Kathmandu and Beijing with regard to Tibet and increased pressure on Tibetan refugees in, or aspiring to reach, Nepal. Lobsang Sangay, the political leader of Tibetans in exile, claimed that “Nepal has become almost a satellite state of China.”
Western governments and human rights groups support the protection of Tibetans and their right to political freedom in Nepal, and they have condemned human rights abuses by Nepali government forces against Tibetan refugees. However, most Western governments are apparently reluctant to raise the issue directly with the GoN. Certainly Beijing’s insistence on a hard-line response seems to carry more weight with the GoN than Western concerns for human rights.
There is general recognition within Nepal that Kathmandu’s co-operation with Beijing on the Tibet issue represents the quid pro quo for development assistance and other... forms of support from China. In August 2011 it was reported that, “Nepal renewed its commitment… not to allow anti-Chinese activities on its soil, as a top-level Chinese delegation announced a US$50 million aid package.” This juxtaposition of developments is unlikely to be coincidental. It suggests that despite China’s stated policy of non-interference, it does effectively make aid to Nepal conditional on the GoN’s compliance with Beijing’s policy of suppressing Tibetan activism.
For Beijing then, stability in Nepal is first and foremost about containing the threat of Tibetan secession. However, Beijing’s expressions of concern for stability go beyond the Tibet issue. It has been increasingly vocal in recent years in support of political stability in Nepal and has stressed the importance of completing key provisions of the peace agreement, such as the new constitution. When Zhou Yongkang visited Kathmandu in the immediate aftermath of the resignation of Prime Minister Khanal, he conveyed Beijing’s “sincere wish that Nepali political leaders can bring peace and stability back to their country as soon as possible.” Likewise, there have been repeated exhortations to Nepal’s politicians to resolve their differences through dialogue and to complete the peace and constitutional process.
Contrary to the suspicions of some Western analysts when the Maoists came to power, China appears to have no interest in promoting an ideological agenda in Nepal. During the war, Beijing made clear that it had no connection with the Maoist insurgents despite their name; indeed in some Chinese quarters it was felt that Nepal’s Maoists tarnished the reputation of Mao Zedong. In 2005 Beijing affirmed its support for King Gyanendra’s attempt to stabilise Nepal through a hard-line approach towards the Maoists. This underlines that China’s concern was, and is, to have an effective and reliable interlocutor in Kathmandu. Hence, in a previous era, it was perfectly content to do business with the Nepali monarchy, despite it being the ideological antithesis of the Chinese model. It is also linked to the non-interference principle of Chinese foreign policy, which holds that the policies of the host government should always be respected, no matter who it is or what it does.
In the post-CPA era China has been assiduous in trying to reach out to a range of Nepali political parties, as well as to different Nepali institutions. This is reflected in the official invitations to visit Beijing extended to the Nepali Congress and to the Madhes parties, as well as to the Maoists and the CPN-UML. In the uncertain environment of Nepali politics, China is regarded as “hedging its bets” by cultivating relations with a range of different parties and institutions. This highlights Beijing’s pragmatic approach towards the politics of Nepal. It prioritises stability above ideology or political system, and is willing to do business with whoever is in power.
**Economic interests**
As described above, Nepal and China have substantially boosted economic ties in recent years. This is evident from the increase of the trade volume by 80 percent in a single year from 2009–10 (US$744 million). This reflects China’s ‘Going Out’ policy, which aims to sustain high levels of domestic economic growth through external economic engagement. Since the CPC’s domestic legitimacy is based heavily on continuing the country’s high rates of growth, economic motives play a central role in Beijing’s foreign policy, including its increased engagement in Nepal. Economic engagement in Nepal facilitates the entry of Chinese firms into new markets. Nepal represents one such market, but beyond lie the larger markets of South Asia. Improving its economic relations with Nepal – as well as the local infrastructure – could potentially enable China to use Nepal as a transit country for trade with the whole of South Asia.
China’s growing engagement in Nepal can, therefore, be seen to be motivated in part by its strategy of economic expansion. This is further illustrated by the close link between Chinese aid and Chinese business interests. A large proportion of Chinese aid to Nepal is provided as ‘aid in kind’, often the construction of infrastructure by a Chinese contractor. China’s White Paper on Foreign Aid explains how in such cases “the Chinese side is responsible for the whole or part of the process… After a project is completed, China hands it over to the recipient country”.
According to the White Paper, such projects account for 40 percent of total Chinese aid.
The rapidly increasing economic engagement between China and Nepal – in terms of aid, trade and investment – illustrates an important new dimension of China’s interest in Nepal. While Nepal’s importance for stability in Tibet has underpinned China’s relations with the country since the 1950s – and this remains Beijing’s predominant concern – it also offers substantial potential to fuel China’s economic development. Nepal is a market for Chinese goods in its own right, but more importantly it could also be a gateway to the markets of South Asia. A senior Chinese official spoke of “developing Nepal as a transit hub between China and the larger sub-continent”. This demonstrates the synergy between China’s security interests in Nepal vis-à-vis Tibet and China’s economic interests. A stable Nepal is in China’s interests as far as Tibet is concerned, while it also presents a more attractive opportunity for Chinese trade, investment and other forms of economic engagement.
Geopolitics
China and India have the two largest populations and fastest growing economies in the world. Relations between these two rising powers have been characterised by a “persistent mutual trust deficit”. At present, China is the more powerful of the two in economic and diplomatic terms at the global level, while it also threatens India’s predominance in South Asia. Since 2004, China has improved trade relations with a number of India’s neighbours and the volume of trade with Pakistan, Bangladesh and Sri Lanka has grown rapidly. Strengthened bilateral relations between China and India’s neighbours are complemented by China’s admission into the South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), which enables China to engage in South Asia through a multilateral mechanism.
These developments have prompted references to “China’s growing dominance of the South Asian landscape… and the rapidity with which New Delhi is ceding strategic space to Beijing on the sub-continent”. While this may be overstating the case, there is certainly an asymmetric relation between China and India, despite both being economic powerhouses. And it follows that India may be concerned about further expansion of Chinese influence into what has historically been regarded as New Delhi’s sphere of influence.
Nepal’s position has become more strategically significant with the rise of China. Situated between the two regional powers, it can be seen as a prize to be captured and could become the locus of geopolitical competition between an expanding China and a defensive India. This possibility is increased by the fact that Nepal is weak and internally vulnerable, and thus less able to resist foreign interference. According to
74 Op cit State Council of the People’s Republic of China, p 7. 75 Ibid. 76 Op cit ‘A stable Nepal is in China’s interests’. 77 Singh S, ‘Paradigm shift in India-China relations: from bilateralism to multilateralism’, Journal of International Affairs, Spring/Summer 2011, vol 64 no 2. 78 Op cit Sahoo. 79 Pant H V, ‘How China changes SAARC’, Livemint, 28 April 2010, www.livemint.com/2010/04/28210010/How-China-changes-Saarc.html?id=1, accessed 28 October 2011. some, “the ongoing political paralysis in Nepal… [has] created the ideal conditions for Beijing to increase its leverage and influence over Nepal.” Others foresee that “the weakness and collapse of Nepal would offer an opportunity for China to engage directly in South Asia.”
There is a counter-argument based on the fact that China and India share a strong interest in their own economic development and do not wish to jeopardise current growth trajectories, nor undermine their lucrative bilateral trade. China was India’s largest trading partner in 2008, and trade between the two countries has risen dramatically from US$1.0 billion in 1994 to US$61 billion in 2010. According to this view, the main driver of China – India relations is a mutual interest in economic growth and this will safeguard the region against a confrontation between the two powers. Nevertheless, the unprecedented economic growth of both powers does not yet seem to have had the effect of cementing stability in the political relationship.
Nepal’s role is also related to wider geopolitical dynamics, both within the Asian region and globally. There are many and diverse perspectives on these dynamics. Some contend that the US seeks to strengthen its alliance with India in order to contain China, a goal which underlies its engagement in Pakistan and Afghanistan and also informs US policy towards Nepal. Others hold that China is supporting Pakistan to keep India tied down in South Asia, leaving Beijing free to expand its access and influence more broadly across the Asian continent, including in Nepal. However, the significance of Nepal for either China or India should not be over-stated. It is questionable to what extent Nepal is regarded as a foreign policy priority in New Delhi, while equally it does not feature much in foreign policy debates in China. According to one analyst “both countries have bigger fish to fry”; and more dispassionate analysis suggests that both countries will prioritise their relationship with the other over their relationship with Kathmandu.
In this regard, it is notable that both China and India are increasingly using multilateral structures to facilitate bilateral relations. Both have an interest in reforming the international diplomatic architecture, which they consider to be Western-led. Hence the emergence of new configurations of ‘rising powers’, including the China-India-Russia strategic triangle and the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) grouping. China is also increasingly engaged in the South Asian regional structure SAARC, where India has the main voice, while India has observer status in the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, which China dominates. These various multilateral frameworks may provide a framework for strengthening understanding and mutual trust, including in respect of Nepal.
What is clear is that Sino-Indian relations have a significant effect upon geopolitics in the South Asia region, and thus upon peace and stability in Nepal. Some degree of competition between the two rising powers seems inevitable; yet historical rivalries have been managed thus far, and the hope is that shared economic interests will outweigh geopolitical rivalry.
80 Op cit Sakhuja. 81 Cohen S P, India: Emerging power, (Brookings Institution Press, 2001). 82 International Institute for Strategic Studies, ‘India and China eye each other warily’, Strategic Comments, December 2010, Vol 16, Comment 47, www.iiss.org/members-login/?ReturnUrl=/publications/strategic-comments/past-issues/volume-16-2010/december/, accessed 28 October 2011. 83 Holslag J, China and India: Prospects for peace, (Columbia University Press, 2010). 84 Friedman T L, ‘Containment-lite’, New York Times, 9 November 2010, www.nytimes.com/2010/11/10/opinion/10friedman.html, accessed 28 October 2011. 85 Subrahmanyam K, ‘The great China-Pak nuclear nexus’, Times of India, 21 June 2010, articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2010-06-21/india/28309082_1_nag-exemption-china-pak-nuclear-reactors, accessed 28 October 2011. 86 Saferworld interviews, Beijing/Shanghai, July 2011. 87 Saferworld interview, Kathmandu, May 2011. Clearly, the geopolitical drama between China and India is not played out in a vacuum, and a number of other international actors are also engaged in minor roles. Nepal receives relatively high levels of international attention and aid and it has been referred to as the "darling of Western donors." The major multilateral donors are the Asian Development Bank and the World Bank, while the largest bilateral donors are Japan (US$105 million), the UK (US$101 million) and the US (US$76 million). In March 2011 the UK Department for International Development (DFID) announced that it would increase aid to Nepal from £57 million (US$91 million) in 2010/11 to £103 million (US$165 million) by 2014/15. Meanwhile, USAID's spending in Nepal has increased almost fourfold since 2002. In comparison, the amount of grant-aid China gives to Nepal is relatively small, amounting to 150 million renminbi (RMB) (approximately US$23 million).
The increase in Western spending in Nepal reflects in part an increasing appreciation among Western donors of the connection between security and development and of the need for higher levels of support to be provided in contexts that are fragile and conflict-affected, such as Nepal. A substantial part of Western aid to Nepal is allocated to consolidating the peace process and to helping Nepal transition out of the post-conflict phase towards becoming a more stable and democratic state. This includes support for constitutional development, integration, security sector reform, election processes and local governance. Other major areas of support from Western donors to Nepal include health, water and sanitation and climate change adaptation.
Western donors are considered to have used the leverage of their aid, and accompanying conditionalities, to good effect in helping to bring about a negotiated end to Nepal's war in 2006. However, there is now a perception that the GoN takes Western aid for granted and judges it unlikely that the tap will really be turned off. Western donors have been criticised for "proposing vague conditionalities that will not be followed through"; whereas Chinese or Indian threats to stop support are taken more seriously, informed inter alia by the experience of the Indian petrol blockade. Thus the implicit conditionality of support from Beijing and New Delhi appears to be more effective than the explicit conditionalities of Western donors.
These trends relate to criticisms in Nepal of Western donors' methods of operating. Some Nepalis have expressed growing resentment in recent years about the approach taken by Western donors and their perceived proxies, INGOs. There is a perception among some in Kathmandu that much Western aid ends up in the pockets of Western NGOs and consultants, with little benefit or ownership by Nepali people. This has led to concerns among Western NGOs in Nepal that such sentiments may culminate in the sort of antipathy towards Western NGOs and donors that is evident in Sri Lanka. Meanwhile, according to some donor sources it is becoming harder to spend donor funds efficiently and effectively, while a lack of co-ordination between Western donors and the GoN regarding the deployment of funds has led to a souring of the relationship between the two.
It is important to bear in mind that for all international actors, just as for China, aid represents part of the picture of their engagement in Nepal but not the totality. The particular security concerns and strategic interests of India have already been touched upon, but Western actors too have interests in addition to the provision of development assistance through aid. These interests include commercial ties, trade, tourism... and military co-operation. The UK Government for instance has a special relationship with Nepal through the Ghurka soldiers, 3,500 of whom currently serve in the British Army and play a full part in its operational deployments, including in Afghanistan. These sorts of interests have a significant bearing on Western engagement in Nepal and potentially also on conflict dynamics.
It is furthermore recognised that for Western governments, as for Beijing, there may be a certain dissonance between stated policies of engagement in Nepal and the actual practice. One could argue that China does in fact impose conditionalities on its support to Nepal as it is effectively contingent on the GoN’s support for the One China policy and on co-operation in control of Tibetan activists. But one could equally argue that concerns about human rights abuses expressed by some Western governments are mainly rhetorical, and that policies are rather shaped by realpolitik.
It is not within the scope of this study to examine the full range of international interests in Nepal and their implications for conflict and security. However, it does highlight the importance of understanding how the interventions of Western actors too may aggravate or mitigate conflict risks in Nepal. In this regard, it is worth mentioning a Saferworld/University of Bradford joint project that provides a framework for assessing the conflict prevention impact of external actors. In brief, the project has developed a framework and indicators for measuring the performance of a state in ‘contributing to a benign global or regional context’, which includes indicators relating to trade and aid policies. The aim of the project, which is currently being piloted, is to enhance knowledge and awareness of what states should do to improve conflict prevention performance and co-operation. Although the current project is oriented towards Western donors, the aspiration is to develop a framework that accommodates all states, including China and other rising powers.
4.6 Impact on peace and conflict
How does China’s increasing engagement in Nepal relate to issues of peace and conflict? Clearly, different actors will view this differently, depending upon their underlying assumptions about what causes conflict and builds peace. From a Chinese perspective, the presumption is that economic development leads to peace. The general opinion is that the root cause of conflict is underdevelopment, and so by providing resources for infrastructure and economic development in Nepal, China’s engagement will have a positive long-term impact on peacebuilding and conflict prevention.
This contrasts with the dominant view among Western donors that, in simple terms, conflicts arise from a variety of sources, including underdevelopment but also encompassing issues to do with identity, inequality and governance. It is based on a model of peacebuilding developed in the post-Cold War period referred to as a ‘liberal peace’. This model includes an emphasis on political solutions; human security; the rights of minorities to self-determination; the universal importance of human rights; freedom of speech and free and fair elections; and a definition of state sovereignty that, in extreme circumstances, legitimates humanitarian intervention by external actors. As recent events in Libya illustrate, the liberal peace model is far from being universally accepted.
In Western discourse around peace and conflict, there is also increasing recognition that any external engagement in a conflict-prone context, such as Nepal, will inevitably have an impact upon the peace and conflict environment – whether directly or indirectly – and China’s engagement is no exception. The consensus from a range of interviews in Kathmandu was that China’s primary concern in Nepal is stability so that it can contain the threat from Tibetan dissidents; and that this desire for stability is reinforced by China’s economic interests and geopolitical strategy. Based on this view, there is little to suggest that China’s increasing engagement will have a directly negative impact upon the conflict drivers and risks identified in the earlier part of the paper.
Interlocutors in Nepal did however identify a number of ways in which China’s increasing role and influence could potentially affect, or indirectly impact upon, conflict issues and dynamics. In the next section we consider each of these issues in turn and assess to what extent they can be considered significant threats to peace and stability in Nepal.
**Stability and peace**
From a Chinese perspective, the stability of a country is equated with the capacity of its government to control it. Where Nepal is concerned, the primary indicator of stability in Beijing’s eyes is that the threat from Tibetan dissidents is extinguished, or at least contained. This entails the GoN affirming its commitment to the One China policy and Nepal’s security forces co-operating in the repression of Tibetan dissidents. Beijing has successfully exerted its influence over the Government in Kathmandu to secure its co-operation in both respects, and Tibetan activism in Nepal has reduced as a consequence. In this sense then, China can be seen to have contributed to stability in Nepal.
However, this prompted the question among some interlocutors of what ‘stability’ means? China’s understanding of the term may be at odds with that of Nepalis or Western actors. It would be misleading to suggest that there is a single agreed definition of stability shared by all Western actors, let alone by different branches of the same government. Clearly, stability may be understood differently if a Ministry’s mandate is to protect national security rather than to reduce poverty overseas, and hence the term is the subject of much debate. The UK Government in its cross-departmental strategy for ‘Building Stability Overseas’ (BSOS) articulates a relatively inclusive definition of stability as follows:
“The stability we are seeking to support can be characterised in terms of political systems which are representative and legitimate, capable of managing conflict and change peacefully, and societies in which human rights and rule of law are respected, basic needs are met, security established and opportunities for social and economic development are open to all.”
China’s policy towards Tibetans in Nepal, as put into effect by the Nepali Government and security forces, does not reflect the BSOS definition of stability. Freedom of political expression is clearly denied to Tibetans in Nepal and there are credible allegations of human rights violations against Tibetan activists. China’s understanding of stability in Nepal is thus at odds with the UK Government’s definition of the term. Likewise, China’s policy towards Tibetan refugees is not compatible with the concept of ‘liberal peace’, which prevails in Europe and is understood to include the rights of minorities, freedom of speech and the protection of human and political rights.
Clearly terms like ‘peace’ and ‘stability’ will be understood differently depending upon the norms and assumptions of the state concerned, and they may be interpreted to suit particular interests. But does China’s policy towards Tibetans in Nepal have a negative impact upon the conflict environment? In particular, does the denial of the human and political rights of Tibetans threaten to cause violent conflict in Nepal? It seems unlikely as the Tibet issue is largely unrelated to the fundamental drivers of conflict in Nepal, while concern and protest about the treatment of Tibetans tends to be stronger outside the country than within. Nevertheless, from a Western perspective, China’s policy towards Tibetans weakens any claims it may make to be supporting an inclusive and sustainable peace in Nepal.
______________________________________________________________________
100 UK DFID, Foreign and Commonwealth Office and Ministry of Defence, Building stability overseas strategy (July 2011). Another way in which China’s engagement may affect peace in Nepal relates to governance. A common criticism in the West of China’s engagement in developing countries is that its policy of non-interference undermines good governance and democratisation. This is especially the case in China’s relations with regimes that are isolated by the West (such as Burma/Myanmar and Zimbabwe), but it also applies in countries going through a post-conflict transition, such as Nepal, where Western donors seek to promote ‘progressive’ reforms in governance and related areas. China’s position on this issue is that “standards, rights and rules … need to be worked out by [national stakeholders] and not imposed by outsiders”. In other words, it is not for China to determine what it regards as the political choices of sovereign states.
In the case of Nepal, Beijing wants stability and is pragmatic about the means used to achieve this. As argued above, it appears to have little concern about what the governance system that delivers stability looks like, but will back the perceived favourite. Hence Beijing’s previous support for Nepal’s monarchy, while currently it regards the Maoists as the best bet – or the least worst – for achieving stability. However, some foresee that China will lose patience with the current peace process, predicated on multi-party politics and a democratic model of governance, as it is taking so long to deliver stability. A fear was expressed that in this case Beijing may support an alternative, more authoritarian system in Nepal, which would not reflect the governance values (e.g. representation and legitimacy) that are associated with Western concepts of peace and stability.
This scenario may be possible but it seems unlikely. A return to monarchy, although it has its proponents, is highly improbable; while residual fears that Beijing would automatically favour a Maoist form of authoritarianism have little ground. Despite the apparent ideological kinship with Nepal’s Maoists, Beijing has been careful not to be seen to favour one Nepali political party over another. As described above, it has reached out – not always successfully – to political actors on all sides and in 2011 invited all four of Nepal’s major parties to visit Beijing. Thus China has sought to present itself as an impartial and apolitical presence in Nepal. Some consider that Beijing is simply ‘hedging its bets’ in light of Nepal’s chronic political instability and volatility. Nevertheless, its repeated exhortations to Nepal’s politicians to resolve their differences through dialogue and to complete the peace and constitutional process seem to reflect a judgement in Beijing that fulfilling the existing peace process currently offers the best prospect for stability in Nepal.
It is hard to argue with the view from Beijing that the benefits of Chinese aid, such as economic and infrastructural development, will improve standards of living among Nepalis and thus reduce tensions that might otherwise give rise to conflict. At the same time, the benefits of Chinese aid may also increase inequalities and divisions, both between local Nepali communities and between Nepalis and Chinese in-comers. Given the scale of Chinese investments and development in Nepal, there is considerable risk that this sizeable injection of resources will upset the balance of local power and interests, which may lead to violence.
In September 2011, there was a bomb attack on a Chinese food factory in the Narsingh district of the Terai. This was reportedly carried out by the Janatantrik Tera-Madhesi Mukti Party, an armed militia battling for the independence of the Terai, which aims to expel Chinese and ‘non-indigenous’ populations from the region. It is the first
______________________________________________________________________
101 See for example: Naim M, ‘Rogue aid’, Foreign Policy, 1 March 2007, www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2007/02/14/rogue_aid, accessed 28 October 2011. 102 Brautigam D, ‘China, Africa and the international aid architecture’, African Development Bank, Working Papers Series, 2010, no 107, p 29. 103 Saferworld interview, Kathmandu, May 2011. 104 Ibid. 105 Ibid. 106 ‘Nepal: China: Terai, the first attack on Chinese industry’, Spero News, 6 September 2011, www.speroforum.com/a/59803/Nepal--China---Terai-the-first-attack-on-Chinese-industry, accessed 28 October 2011. attack against Chinese industry in the region, but it is feared there may be more to follow given the proliferation of Chinese entrepreneurs in the Terai, especially in the construction, textile and hotel industries. The risk of violence arising from the influx of Chinese companies into Nepal is likely to become a growing concern for peace and security from the perspective of Beijing, as well as from Kathmandu.
Another concern expressed was that China’s growing role and influence may provoke India into a response that threatens Nepal’s peace. This is based on the assumption that India considers Nepal as being within its sphere of influence and so will regard China’s increasing engagement as a threat. According to such views, New Delhi is apprehensive that China’s expansion into Nepal is part of a wider plan to contain and encircle India. One Indian analyst reports “a substantial amount of concern among the Indian establishment. The Chinese are making inroads across South Asia.” According to this analysis, Chinese infrastructural developments in Nepal, combined with the build-up of its military capabilities in Tibet, will enable the PLA to deploy rapidly to India’s borders.
Various recent events are attributed to Indian concern about China’s growing role in Nepal. The petrol shortage in Nepal in early 2011 was seen by some as engineered by New Delhi in reaction to the then Government’s proximity to Beijing. India also remains closely involved in Nepal’s politics and reportedly it has stepped up its micro-management of Nepali politicians to counter Chinese influence. There was a notorious controversy in late 2010 when a recording was leaked of a man with a Chinese accent offering US$6.9 million to a Maoist party leader to bribe 50 Nepali members of parliament to support a Maoist government. This affair was portrayed in India as evidence of China’s meddling in Nepali politics. However, the recording has not been verified, nor the identity of the Chinese speaker, and it is suspected in some quarters that the whole incident was an Indian propaganda exercise. Whatever the reality, these incidents indicate increased tensions between the two powers over Nepal.
India’s concerns about China’s proximity to Kathmandu are compounded by its distrust of the Maoists – despite New Delhi’s instrumental role in bringing them into the political process in 2005. The fact that the UCPN-M party still debates whether India should be considered as ‘national enemy number one’ illustrates that the distrust and antagonism between New Delhi and Nepal’s Maoists is mutual. That said, different factions within the Maoist party are perceived to have different views about Nepal’s neighbours. Thus Prachanda is regarded as being relatively pro-Beijing, while Baburam Bhattarai is considered to be more sympathetic to New Delhi. The appointment of Bhattarai as Nepal’s Prime Minister in August 2011 was thus viewed in India as a reassuring development. Furthermore, the fact that Bhattarai made his first official visit to New Delhi rather than to Beijing, unlike his predecessor, may presage a swing back towards the traditional balance of power.
Another cause for concern in New Delhi has been that the Maoist regime in Nepal could lend support to Maoist rebels in India, the Naxalites. There have been rumours of Naxalites receiving military training from Nepal’s Maoists, and in 2010 the Indian Ambassador lodged a protest with the GoN over “organised training” of Naxalites in Maoist camps in Nepal. However, no evidence has been provided to substantiate
107 Bhattacharyya A, quoted in: ‘India and China vie for influence in Nepal’, Defence Forum India, 8 March 2009, defenceforumindia.com/military-strategy/441-india-china-vie-influence-nepal.html, accessed 28 October 2011. 108 Ibid. 109 Saferworld interviews, Kathmandu, May 2011. 110 Magnier M, ‘Nepal caught between China and India’, Los Angeles Times, 20 February 2011, articles.latimes.com/2011/feb/20/world/asia-fg-nepal-china-20110220/2, accessed 28 October 2011. 111 ‘Prime Minister Bhattarai’s visit to India: Renewing ties in critical transition phase’, Eurasia Review, 25 October 2011, www.eurasiareview.com/25102011, accessed November 5, 2011. 112 Op cit Magnier. 113 ‘India protests Naxals’ training on “Nepali soil”’, Ekantipur, 5 November 2010, aa.59.78ae.static.theplanet.com/2010/11/05/top-story/india-protests-naxals--training-on-nepali-soil/324646.html, accessed 28 October 2011. this allegation, and most analysts consider a connection between Nepal’s Maoists and India’s Naxalites to be far-fetched.\\textsuperscript{114}
China and India are seen to have adopted different approaches to Nepal: Beijing playing a strategic ‘long-game’, whereas India’s approach is regarded as more tactical and short-term.\\textsuperscript{115} India’s tactics include alleged attempts to obstruct and undermine key aspects of the CPA, including the constitution and integration processes.\\textsuperscript{116} Certainly there are suggestions that Indian manoeuvring has undermined Western attempts to support the peace process.\\textsuperscript{117} The alleged obstructionism reflects Indian concern that the integration of Maoist combatants will weaken its special relationship with the Nepalese Army. There is a risk that such tactics – or at least the perception of them – will increase disillusionment with Nepal’s peace process and may lead to its ultimate collapse. If China’s growing role provokes India to intensify its involvement in Nepal’s politics, this risks aggravating divisions among Nepali political leaders, destabilising the political situation and further delaying the implementation of the CPA.
Indian concerns about China’s expansion into its sphere of influence, allied to its distrust of the Maoists, have the potential to provoke a response that could disrupt the peace process and destabilise Nepal. However, Beijing appears well aware of India’s sensitivity given the historic privileged relationship between Delhi and Kathmandu. Thus far, it has been careful not to over-play its hand; indeed it has on occasion urged the Nepali Government to work at restoring its relationship with New Delhi. Furthermore, the preceding analysis suggests that China’s increased engagement in Nepal, and the shift in the relative influence of the two powers, may lead to a net gain in terms of peace and stability. If India is seen to have a destabilising influence on Nepal’s peace process while China has a broadly stabilising influence, then China’s increasing engagement should have a positive effect in terms of peace and stability.
Changing balance of influence with the West
China’s growing role in Nepal does not just shift the balance of power and influence \\textit{vis-à-vis} India, it also affects the role and influence of Western powers, including their ability to influence the peace process. In Nepal, as in other developing countries, China’s increased support for the government means that it becomes less dependent upon Western aid. This may diminish Western leverage to persuade the Nepali Government to address some of the more difficult aspects of the conflict, which Western analysts believe must be addressed for peace to be sustainable. Such aspects include the human rights abuses carried out by all sides during the war. These are due to be addressed by a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, but this commission has yet to be set up.\\textsuperscript{118} If human rights abuses are not dealt with, then impunity will become entrenched; and impunity is often an underlying driver of conflict.
Western policy makers need to be aware of this changing international context and of the implications for their own strategies for peace and development in Nepal. If the approach of Western donors is perceived to be overly prescriptive and/or conditional – as some contend with regard to issues like integration and security sector reform – this may push the Nepali Government to seek support from other sources.\\textsuperscript{119} The likelihood is that the Government will turn to states like China that generally provide what the Government requests – often hardware rather than ‘software’ – and provide it with no strings attached. This may affect the democratic quality of the systems that emerge, and it is a particular concern in areas like the security and justice sectors, where weak governance can lead to violence and insecurity.
\\textsuperscript{114} Saferworld interviews, Kathmandu, May 2011. \\textsuperscript{115} Ibid. \\textsuperscript{116} Adhikari M, ‘Fault lines in Indo-Nepal relations’, Republica, 6 July 2011, www.myrepublica.com/portal/index.php?action=news_details&news_id=33140, accessed 28 October 2011. \\textsuperscript{117} Saferworld interview, Kathmandu, May 2011. \\textsuperscript{118} Ibid. \\textsuperscript{119} Gautam K C, ‘Inconvenient truths’, Nepal Times, 22 April 2011, www.nepaltimes.com.np/issue/2011/04/22/Review/18125/print, accessed 28 October 2011. The implication in this case is that China’s growing role in Nepal is freeing the GoN from pressure to comply with Western standards of good governance and human rights. China’s increased aid to the Nepali Government means that the ‘donor marketplace’ is expanding. By offering an alternative model of support to the traditional Western donors, China (and India) are introducing more competition into this marketplace. This weakens the bargaining position of Western donors since it means that the Nepali Government has more options regarding from whom it would like to receive development assistance and with what, if any, strings attached.120
It is hard to predict what will be the implications for peace and conflict of an expanded donor marketplace in Nepal. It would be naïve to suggest that the agendas of Western donors are wholly benign in contrast to those of China or India. All external actors that engage in Nepal, as in other developing countries, do so based on a calculus of different interests: economic, security, developmental and geostrategic. So it does not automatically follow that a decline in the influence of Western donors will increase the prospect of conflict in Nepal.
It is also important to keep in mind the fundamental role and agency of Nepalis themselves. The focus of this study is upon external actors, notably China, and how their engagement affects peace and conflict in Nepal. The role of foreign powers in Nepal is highly significant, as this report demonstrates, especially in light of shifting balances of power and influence vis-à-vis the government in Kathmandu. However, ultimately it is the Nepali people who will determine whether there is a return to widespread violent conflict or if sustainable peace can be secured.
What the research findings and analysis contained in this report do suggest is that policy makers in the West, in China and in Kathmandu need to engage proactively with the changing realities; and they need to consider what it means for their policies and practice in support of peace and stability. For Western actors, the expansion of the donor marketplace means that the tools of conditionality they have used in the past to support peacebuilding will become less effective. This suggests that not just new tools, but new multi-lateral approaches, will be required if Western donors are to support peace in Nepal and in other conflict-affected states. In the final section of the report we consider what such tools and approaches might include.
4.7 Policy implications
Current situation
What are the implications for policy makers of China’s increasing engagement in Nepal, especially those concerned with issues of peacebuilding and conflict prevention? While there is now broad acceptance and appreciation of the scale and significance of China’s engagement in the developing world, analysts and policy makers in the West are still getting to grips with the implications of this shift in the context. In particular, little attention has been paid thus far to the implications for conflict-affected and fragile states, such as Nepal. How will China’s rise affect conflict drivers and dynamics? And what opportunities may it offer to consolidate peace and stability?
These are questions that policy makers should ask as they consider how to respond to the threats and the opportunities resulting from China’s rise. The final section of this report assesses the current state of play and offers some suggestions for harnessing this change positively in order to support peace and stability in Nepal. We focus primarily on the implications and options for Western governments. We pay special attention to the UK, as it is set to become the largest bilateral donor to Nepal; thus its response to China’s rise will be particularly significant and may influence the approaches of other actors. The following implications are therefore relevant for all governments engaged in Nepal, insofar as they share similar interests and concerns to the UK Government.
120 Harris D, ‘Emerging donors: differentiation, ownership and harmonisation’, The Networker, August–October 2011, www.bond.org.uk/pages/emerging-donors-differentiation-ownership-and-harmonisation.html, accessed 28 October 2011. Donor representatives in Kathmandu suggested that Nepal illustrates a relatively good example of co-ordination and coherence among Western donors,\\textsuperscript{121} and this view is corroborated by the findings of a recent European Union assessment.\\textsuperscript{122} There are reportedly high levels of informal knowledge-sharing among donors, although formal structures and mechanisms for inter-donor co-ordination are limited. There are periodic Head of Mission-level meetings for aid co-ordination, while the United Nations convenes bi-weekly integration and rehabilitation meetings. However, there is no co-ordination structure specifically relating to conflict issues, akin to the Donor Peace Support Groups that have been established in some other countries.
It appears that Chinese officials do not generally engage in the various donor co-ordination forums in Kathmandu; one official from a major Western embassy said he had never seen Chinese representatives in any donor forum.\\textsuperscript{123} It was not possible within the limited scope of this research to clarify whether Chinese representatives are invited to such forums, although apparently Indian representatives are invited to some of them. There used to be a degree of engagement between Western and Chinese diplomats in meetings of representatives of the permanent five members of the UN Security Council regarding the UN Mission in Nepal (UNMIN), but this has ceased since the exit of UNMIN in January 2011.
In part, China’s absence from the various donor co-ordination forums in Kathmandu reflects the very different norms and principles that underpin Chinese aid generally, and its engagement in Nepal in particular. Beijing does not regard itself as part of the Western donors’ ‘club’ and prefers to deal directly with the Nepali Government rather than through multi-donor structures.
However, what was notable from interviews in Kathmandu is the apparent disconnect between most of the Western donor/diplomatic community in Kathmandu and Chinese officials. This disconnect reflects in part the view expressed that it is not worth engaging with Chinese officials in Kathmandu since strategy and policy decisions are made in Beijing.\\textsuperscript{124} However, this seemed to be compounded by the sense of a long-standing cultural divide between Western and Chinese officials, with reference made by Western diplomats to a ‘Chinese Wall’, which blocks substantive exchange regarding issues of aid, development, governance or security.
The UK Government’s aid review published in March 2011 makes clear that Nepal is one of a reduced number of priority countries to qualify for UK development support. Indeed, the UK is set to become the largest bilateral donor to Nepal over the next few years. Furthermore, the UK is one of the lead donors supporting critical aspects of peace and stability in Nepal, such as the Rule of Law. In light of the foregoing analysis of China’s increasingly significant role in Nepal’s development, it seems essential that there be some minimum level of dialogue between UK Government representatives and their Chinese counterparts. And this dialogue should be based on a solid understanding of each country’s interests in Nepal, as well as the range and nature of its engagements.
No doubt Western donors are well aware of the changes in the global landscape and of China’s rise, but it is not apparent that the consequences of this for Nepal have been fully analysed and factored into the development of aid strategies. DFID’s Operational Plan for Nepal 2011–15 notes that “Nepal is of strategic importance to the UK as a fragile state in its own right and as a building block for stability in the region, positioned between China and India”.\\textsuperscript{125} However, this awareness of the regional
\\textsuperscript{121} Saferworld interviews, Kathmandu, May 2011. \\textsuperscript{122} European External Action Service, ‘Nepal country strategy paper 2007–2013: Mid-term review document’, April 2010, www.eeas.europa.eu/nepal/csp/11_13_mtr_en.pdf, accessed 26 November 2011. \\textsuperscript{123} Saferworld interviews, Kathmandu, May 2011. \\textsuperscript{124} Ibid. \\textsuperscript{125} DFID, ‘Operational plan 2011-2015: DFID Nepal’, April 2011, www.dfid.gov.uk/Documents/publications/1/op/nepal-2011.pdf, accessed 28 October 2011. interactions does not appear to have informed UK policy priorities. Given the major investment by Western donors in Nepal’s peace process, and the country’s continuing fragility, it is particularly important to understand how China’s increased engagement impacts upon the peace and conflict environment in Nepal.
It is acknowledged that opportunities and entry points to influence Chinese officials in Kathmandu may be limited. Furthermore, the Chinese Embassy may indeed have limited independent agency to affect Beijing’s policy towards Nepal. However, the impression gained from interviews in Kathmandu is that there is scope for Western donors and diplomats to engage more proactively and systematically with their Chinese counterparts, be that bilaterally or through multi-donor co-ordination forums. Nor is this restricted to officials in Kathmandu; it may be that there is scope for improving information exchange and co-ordination between Western embassies in Beijing and Kathmandu, as well as with their respective foreign ministries.
As China’s engagement and influence in Nepal grows, this should become a priority for Western diplomats and policy makers. The risk is that unless steps are taken soon to overcome the perceived Chinese Wall, the UK and other Western actors will find themselves responding to China’s rise as a threat rather than as an opportunity. This relates to the risk that if Western donors are perceived by the Nepali Government to be too prescriptive or conditional regarding their support, then this may reinforce Nepali resentment about Western interference and ultimately push them further into the arms of China.
In July 2011, the UK Government launched its new strategy for BSOS. In this strategy the Government affirms its intention to “incorporate [the stability] agenda into our developing relationships with the emerging powers”. Obviously the UK Government does not have a monopoly on concern with stability. Other external actors have their own stability agendas, which are likely to diverge from the UK’s. This may present some challenges, but could also be an opportunity for collaboration. As described above, China has its own clear and predominant stability agenda in Nepal, based on its security concerns vis-à-vis Tibet, its economic expansion and its geopolitical strategy.
In order to incorporate the UK’s stability agenda into its developing relationship with China, the UK Government will need to deepen its understanding of China’s interests in conflict-affected states like Nepal. In certain respects, notably Beijing’s policy towards Tibetan activists in Nepal, China’s stability agenda clearly diverges from the stability agenda of the UK and other Western governments. However, in other respects there is apparent common ground between the stability agendas of Western states and of China – for instance, the shared concern to see Nepal’s peace process through to its conclusion.
Therefore as a first step it is suggested that further analysis be undertaken of points of convergence and divergence with regard to Western and Chinese stability agendas. This could serve as the basis for constructive dialogue between Western and Chinese policy makers on issues to do with peace and stability in Nepal. Where there is a shared interest in commonly agreed aspects of stability (whatever the differing norms or motivations behind it), this could be a basis for developing common policy objectives and even practical co-operation. Where there is a difference of perspective or principle – for instance regarding the Tibetan issue – this should be identified, and attempts made on both sides to appreciate the values and interests that underpin the different policy approaches.
Clearly such an approach would require a degree of receptiveness from the Chinese side. It would be a mistake to assume that the Chinese are oblivious to Western concerns about human rights or unaware of the different norms of foreign policy. A senior Chinese analyst at an influential think tank affiliated to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs expressed the “hope that China and the West can work together much more closely on economic aid. But the obstacle is Western suspicion of China, and accusations that China’s non-interference policy means that China lacks any sense of morality in its foreign policy.” However, he went on to note that there is increasing public debate within China about the policy of non-interference; and this may open space for dialogue between policy communities in China and the West about how to promote peace and stability in conflict-affected states.
The UK BSOS strategy goes on to state that the Government “will invest greater diplomatic efforts in new ‘prevention partnerships’ with these countries”. This demonstrates awareness of the growing role that China and other rising powers play in countries at risk of conflict and instability, such as Nepal. It is hoped that the findings of this research project may help to inform the development of a ‘prevention partnership’ with China based on shared objectives of peace and stability; although it is recognised that deeper and more comprehensive research will be required to establish a firm knowledge-base for such a partnership. At a minimum, this project should assist Western policy makers to appreciate the challenges and limitations to their efforts to promote peace and stability in Nepal, and thereby help ensure that policies are not counterproductive.
Looking beyond the bilateral relationship between the UK and China in respect of Nepal, it is recommended that broader international dialogue about peace and stability in Nepal should seek proactively to engage Beijing as well as New Delhi. While support for Nepal’s peace process appears relatively coherent and co-ordinated among Western donors, they should also be looking to connect with Chinese as well as Indian perspectives. This will require a more systematic attempt to build relations with Chinese officials in Kathmandu – as well as with the relevant policy makers in Beijing – and progressively to incorporate China into an inclusive dialogue.
A further area for Western policy makers to consider, and a possible entry point, relates to the notion of ‘conflict sensitivity’. This is based on the understanding that any intervention from outside – developmental, commercial or otherwise – will affect the distribution of power and resources in the local community. Interventions that do not take existing relations and dynamics into account may inadvertently provoke or sustain conflict, and end up doing more harm than good. As noted above, there is a risk that the sizeable injection of Chinese resources into Nepal will upset local interests and power balances, leading to the sort of violent attack against Chinese targets witnessed in the Terai in September 2011. This indicates the value to Chinese companies of adopting a conflict-sensitive approach.
The principle of conflict sensitivity is not new to Nepal. It is recognised that in the past “development programmes have sometimes reinforced the social and political inequalities that are at the root of the violent, armed conflict.” Conflict-sensitive approaches have been adopted in a number of development sectors in Nepal, notably in the forestry sector. The UK Government has promoted and supported conflict-sensitive approaches both internationally and in Nepal. In its response to the multilateral aid review for instance, DFID recommends that “multilateral organisations need to improve their performance in fragile contexts… [and they] need to take a more systematic approach to developing conflict-sensitive programming.”
While not underestimating the challenges of making Chinese engagement in Nepal more conflict-sensitive, this may be an area where the West can collaborate with China. There are clear cost and security benefits to Chinese businesses of a conflict-sensitive approach, while it is also in the interests of Western governments, Beijing and all others concerned with stability in Nepal. Western actors could support this by raising awareness of what it means to be conflict-sensitive, and by sharing ideas and information with Chinese companies investing and operating in Nepal about ways of putting conflict-sensitivity into practice.
More broadly, this study suggests that the UK and other Western governments would do well to consider what the implications are when they no longer ‘own’ the donor marketplace. While the engagement of non-Western powers in Nepal is not a new phenomenon (especially where India is concerned), the growing role of China, and the consequent shifting boundaries of what constitutes aid, are fast changing the context in which Western donors try to support development and peacebuilding in Nepal.
China is not overtly attempting to supplant the traditional donors to Nepal. However, by offering alternative options to the GoN they are weakening the bargaining position of traditional donors, with the consequence that the Western practice of linking aid to conditionalities around governance or human rights will be less effective. We should not overestimate the effectiveness of these conditionalities: some of the concern about emerging powers “overestimates the extent to which [good governance, etc.] have been furthered by direct conditionalities imposed by [Western] donors.” Nevertheless, conditionalities will now be less effective than they were before, so if the UK and others wish to continue to exert a positive influence upon processes of development and peacebuilding, they will need to engage proactively and imaginatively with the new reality of a multi-polar donor context.
In conclusion, this report suggests a number of ways in which Western policy makers could strengthen their engagement with China on issues of peace and stability in Nepal. This is on the basis of a preliminary and light-touch research exercise. It was not possible within the limited scope of this project to explore fully the various forms of Chinese engagement in Nepal or how they interact with conflict drivers; nor has there been a thorough analysis of all international actors. We recommend undertaking more in-depth and systematic research in some of the areas identified above, in order to generate a comprehensive evidence-base and to develop more targeted policy recommendations. However, this report has highlighted a number of key issues to consider, and we hope it will stimulate policy debate as well as practical action in response to the significant changes identified.
129 Woods N, ‘Whose aid? Whose influence? China, emerging donors and the silent revolution in development assistance’, International Affairs (November 2008), vol 84 no 6, p 7. Saferworld works to prevent and reduce violent conflict and promote co-operative approaches to security. We work with governments, international organisations and civil society to encourage and support effective policies and practices through advocacy, research and policy development and through supporting the actions of others.
COVER PHOTO: Sindhupalchok, Nepal – A view of the China-Nepal Friendship Bridge, spanning the Koshi river to link Nepal and Tibet, March 2010 © CHINAPRIVATETRAVEL.COM
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2591-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 29,
"total-input-tokens": 75325,
"total-output-tokens": 22702,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
96,
1
],
[
96,
2259,
2
],
[
2259,
2405,
3
],
[
2405,
4959,
4
],
[
4959,
8901,
5
],
[
8901,
13633,
6
],
[
13633,
17635,
7
],
[
17635,
20698,
8
],
[
20698,
25012,
9
],
[
25012,
28452,
10
],
[
28452,
33479,
11
],
[
33479,
38042,
12
],
[
38042,
42125,
13
],
[
42125,
45590,
14
],
[
45590,
49149,
15
],
[
49149,
53339,
16
],
[
53339,
57498,
17
],
[
57498,
61203,
18
],
[
61203,
65142,
19
],
[
65142,
69184,
20
],
[
69184,
73528,
21
],
[
73528,
78002,
22
],
[
78002,
82536,
23
],
[
82536,
86795,
24
],
[
86795,
91161,
25
],
[
91161,
95243,
26
],
[
95243,
99362,
27
],
[
99362,
101940,
28
],
[
101940,
102438,
29
]
]
} |
544b09c02415a76896c92bbda70fb8869e34e2aa | Seminar 2: Facilitating Interest
Exploring Live Data and Digital Archives within Contemporary Arts Practice
Michael Takeo Magruder Artist and Researcher
For:
The Archivist as Interpreter The British Library, London, UK. 04/03/2016 Computational Art: 2000-Present Michael Takeo Magruder is an artist and researcher in King’s Visualisation Lab, located in the Centre for Computing in the Humanities, King’s College London. His artworks have been showcased in over 200 exhibitions and 30 countries, and embrace a wide-range of New Media, including high-performance computing, networked systems, mobile devices and virtual environments. His work seeks to blend Information Age technologies with modernist aesthetics to explore the formal structures and conceptual paradigms of our networked, digital world.
For further information please visit: www.takeo.org Internet Art: Data_cosm: VRML + Flash + Java: 2005 Visions of Our Communal Dreams v2.0: Virtual (Transitional Space, OSGrid): Takeo, et al., 2012 Visions of Our Communal Dreams v2.0: Physical (Kibla, Maribor, SI): Takeo, et al., 2012 VIRTUAL/PHYSICAL BODIES: exhibition: CENTRE DES ARTS D’ENGHIE-N-LES-BAINS, PARIS, FR: 2008 ¿ikon?: digital video: 5-channel installation + urban screen, Leicester Square, London, UK: 2001 Rhythmic Space(s) : Second Life + Great Hall, Hellerau : CYNetArt, DE : 2007 Vanishing Point(s): The Great Hall, King’s Building, London: Takeo with H. Denard, 2010 Net:Reality exhibition and Communion installation: 20-21 Visual Arts Centre, UK: 2005 Living Data: solo touring exhibition: Peterborough Museum & Art Gallery: 2014 De/coding the Apocalypse: solo exhibition: Inigo Rooms, Somerset House East Wing: 2014 ‘Remixer’ of (Data) Culture
Art as a Platform for Dialogue & Critique DATA & ARCHIVES Aesthetic Journalism: How to Inform Without Informing: Alfredo Cramerotti: Intellect: 2009
Addressing a growing area of focus, Aesthetic Journalism investigates contemporary art exhibitions often through interviews, documentaries, and reports. Theorist and critic Alfredo Cramerotti challenges the way we understand journalism in contemporary culture. Surfacing Contexts Data_Plex (economy) : with D. Baker and D. Steele : 2009 Data_Plex (economy) : Source Material : Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) Data_Plex (economy) : Source Code : VRML (plain text)
```vrml
#VRML V2.0 utf8
WorldInfo {title "Data_Plex (economy) v1.3 : Michael Takeo Magruder with
### ENVIRONMENT: defining environment the world will exist in ###
NavigationInfo
{
headlight FALSE
type ["EXAMINE"]
}
Background
{
skyAngle [0.7853981634, 1.5707963268]
skyColor [1 1 1, 1 1 1, 0 0 0]
groundColor [0 0 0]
}
### TIME & MOTION: defining the time and path behaviors of the world
DEF worldGroupTimer TimeSensor{loop TRUE cycleInterval 120}
DEF cameraMoveTimer TimeSensor{loop TRUE cycleInterval 120}
DEF viewpointSwitchTimer TimeSensor{loop TRUE cycleInterval 25}
DEF y+RotationOI OrientationInterpolator
{
key [0.0 0.5 1.0]
keyValue [0 1 0 0.0000000000, 0 1 0 3.1415926536, 0 1 0 6.2831853071]
}
DEF Camera01PI PositionInterpolator
{
key [0.0 0.5 1.0]
keyValue [0 300 1000, 0 1400 9000, 0 300 1000]
}
DEF Camera04PI PositionInterpolator
{
}
```
Data_Plex (economy) : Les Rencontres Internationales : La Tabacalera, Madrid, ES : 2009 Data_Plex (economy) : Perspective : ‘seeing’ Market Volatility Data_Plex (economy) : Perspective : ‘seeing’ Market Volatility Data_Plex (economy) : Perspective : ‘seeing’ Power Structures Data_Plex (economy) : Perspective : ‘seeing’ Power Structures **Data_Plex (economy) : Perspective : the Abstract Nature of Numbers...**
### Quote Details
| | | | | | | |----------------|-------|---------------|---------------|---------------|---------------| | Previous close | 16,457.66 | Today's volume | 88,007,115 | | | | Open | 16,458.05 | Average daily volume (3 months) | 98,906,347 | | | | Day high | 16,565.73 | Average P/E | 16.2 | | | | Day low | 16,457.60 | 1 year change | +13.45% | | |
Data as of 4:30pm ET, 04/01/2014
### Companies in the Dow Jones Industrial Average
| Company\* | Price | Change | % Change | P/E | Volume | YTD change | |---------------------------|--------|--------|----------|------|--------|------------| | MMM 3M Co | 136.53 | +0.87 | +0.64% | 20.3 | 2.4M | -2.65% | | AXP American Express Co | 91.17 | +1.14 | +1.27% | 18.5 | 2.8M | +0.48% | | T AT&T Inc | 35.09 | +0.02 | +0.06% | 10.4 | 28.8M | -0.20% | | BA Boeing Co | 128.21 | +2.72 | +2.17% | 21.5 | 4.0M | -6.07% | | CAT Caterpillar Inc | 99.81 | +0.44 | +0.44% | 17.4 | 4.8M | -9.91% | | CVX Chevron Corp | 119.00 | +0.09 | +0.08% | 10.7 | 5.4M | -4.73% | | CSCO Cisco Systems Inc | 23.09 | +0.86 | +3.89% | 15.3 | 80.1M | +2.94% | | DD E I du Pont de Nemours and Co | 67.76 | +0.66 | +0.98% | 22.3 | 3.7M | +4.29% | | XOM Exxon Mobil Corp | 97.73 | +0.05 | +0.05% | 13.3 | 9.5M | -3.43% | | GE General Electric Co | 25.87 | -0.02 | -0.08% | 17.6 | 28.5M | -7.71% | | GS Goldman Sachs Group Inc| 165.92 | +2.07 | +1.26% | 10.7 | 3.3M | -6.40% | | HD Home Depot Inc | 79.38 | +0.25 | +0.32% | 21.5 | 6.7M | -3.59% | | INTC Intel Corp | 25.99 | +0.176 | +0.68% | 13.8 | 23.8M | +0.13% | | IBM International Business Machine... | 194.50 | +2.01 | +1.04% | 13.0 | 5.4M | +3.69% | | JNJ Johnson & Johnson | 97.94 | -0.29 | -0.30% | 20.4 | 7.1M | +6.93% | | DIS Walt Disney Co | 81.57 | | | | | |
*Company names are abbreviated for brevity.* Uncovering Narratives (in)Remembrance [11-M] : Digital Media Installation : 2009-10 (in)Remembrance [11-M] : Manifesta 8 : Museo Regional de Arte Moderno Cartagena, ES : 2010 (in)Remembrance [11-M] - public record: Photographic Archive (News Media)
HTTP://GRAPHICS8.NYTIMES.COM/IMAGES/2007/02/15/WORLD/15CND-TRIAL.450.JPG (in)Remembrance [11-M] - public record: Photographic Archive (News Media)
HTTP://IMAGE.GUARDIAN.CO.UK/SYS-IMAGES/GUARDIAN/Pix/gallery/2004/03/12/bodies.jpg (in) Remembrance [11-M] - public record: Photographic Archive (Social Media)
HTTP://FARM1.STATIC.FLICKR.COM/56/147841342_BFACAC88C8_Z.JPG?zz=1 (in) Remembrance [11-M] - public record: Photographic Archive (Social Media)
HTTP://FARM3.STATIC.FLICKR.COM/2657/4186329838_00ede0b4ce_o.jpg (in) Remembrance [11-M] - public record: Photographic Archive: Physical (in)Remembrance [11-M] : Manifesta 8 : Museo Regional de Arte Moderno Cartagena, ES : 2010 (in)Remembrance [11-M] - transition i - v : Born-Digital Creations (in) Remembrance [11-M] - transition i - v: Physical Artefacts ? Ownership ?
? Access ?
? Control ? “Seeing” Differently
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2592-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 42,
"total-input-tokens": 49383,
"total-output-tokens": 4026,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
235,
1
],
[
235,
267,
2
],
[
267,
860,
3
],
[
860,
911,
4
],
[
911,
1006,
5
],
[
1006,
1094,
6
],
[
1094,
1185,
7
],
[
1185,
1282,
8
],
[
1282,
1359,
9
],
[
1359,
1447,
10
],
[
1447,
1533,
11
],
[
1533,
1611,
12
],
[
1611,
1698,
13
],
[
1698,
1769,
14
],
[
1769,
1769,
15
],
[
1769,
1785,
16
],
[
1785,
2138,
17
],
[
2138,
2157,
18
],
[
2157,
2214,
19
],
[
2214,
2290,
20
],
[
2290,
3220,
21
],
[
3220,
3308,
22
],
[
3308,
3371,
23
],
[
3371,
3434,
24
],
[
3434,
3496,
25
],
[
3496,
3558,
26
],
[
3558,
5967,
27
],
[
5967,
5989,
28
],
[
5989,
6051,
29
],
[
6051,
6142,
30
],
[
6142,
6142,
31
],
[
6142,
6290,
32
],
[
6290,
6447,
33
],
[
6447,
6591,
34
],
[
6591,
6733,
35
],
[
6733,
6805,
36
],
[
6805,
6896,
37
],
[
6896,
6963,
38
],
[
6963,
7026,
39
],
[
7026,
7065,
40
],
[
7065,
7086,
41
],
[
7086,
7086,
42
]
]
} |
6d64d09ca06f24c9b9f69ae0f01650132ea3c6f4 | Facilitation and conflict resolution Councillor workbook
## Contents
| Section | Page | |----------------------------------------------|------| | Foreword | 3 | | Introduction | 4 | | Recognising conflict | 5 | | What is community conflict? | 5 | | A diversity of views is not necessarily a bad thing | 6 | | Your role in preventing and resolving disputes | 8 | | Resolving conflict | 10 | | Bringing people together | 10 | | Facilitating an agreement | 13 | | The use of mediation | 16 | | Preventing future conflicts | 17 | | Summary | 18 | | A final word | 18 | | Next steps | 19 | | Appendix A – Sources of further information | 20 | This workbook has been designed as a learning aid for elected members. It makes no judgement about whether you have been a member for some time, or whether you have been elected more recently. If you fall into the former category the workbook should serve as a useful reminder of the key features of effective facilitation and conflict resolution.
Those members who are new to local government will recognise that they have much to learn. This workbook will provide you with an understanding of the principles behind facilitation and conflict resolution and the importance of this in the communities you serve.
The workbook offers few firm rules for ward members as it is recognised that each individual must decide how best to facilitate group discussions and resolve real or potential conflicts in the community. This will be influenced by the governance arrangements in your council area and the nature of the individuals and community groups in your ward. As such, there is no presumption about ‘typical wards’ or ‘typical members’ and the workbook should serve more as a direction marker rather than a road map.
In practical terms, the document will take around two to three hours to work through. You do not need to complete it all in one session and may prefer to work through the material at your own pace. The key requirement is to think about the issues presented and how the material relates to your local situation, the people you serve and the council you represent. In working through the material contained in this workbook you will encounter a number of features designed to help you think about the nature of facilitation and conflict resolution. These features are represented by the symbols shown below:
**Guidance** – this is used to indicate research, quotations, explanations and definitions that you may find helpful.
**Challenges** – these are questions or queries raised in the text which ask you to reflect on your role or approach – in essence, they are designed to be thought-provokers.
**Case studies** – these are ‘pen pictures’ of approaches used by other people or organisations.
**Hints and tips** – these represent a selection of good practices which you may find useful.
**Useful links** – these are signposts to sources of further information and support, outside of the workbook, which may help with principles, processes, methods and approaches. A full list of useful additional information and support is also set out in appendix A of the workbook. Recognising conflict
What is community conflict?
Community conflict can occur within your ward at any time. Sometimes it is the result of intergenerational tensions, with older residents feeling that the behaviour of young people is unacceptable and contributing to neighbourhood decline. Occasionally the conflict results from an escalation in tensions between different ethnic groups or established and newly-arriving communities. Elsewhere, there may be conflicts within communities as a result of criminal activity, such as drug dealing, street violence or prostitution. Your council and its partner agencies may need to spend valuable time, effort and resources trying to understand and resolve these disputes. But to ignore the rising tensions can present far greater problems, including the escalation of the conflict and potentially more destructive impacts on the people you serve.
As a community leader, you can play a pivotal role in keeping close to your constituents and understanding their needs, views and concerns. Conflict occurs when different groups in the community decide that the way they see the world is different from how others see it. Understanding where people are coming from is the first step in helping to prevent conflict. And as this workbook will demonstrate, there are many tactics, approaches and strategies you can adopt in resolving disputes between local people before they can escalate into disorder or even violence.
Helping to prevent conflict – a member perspective
“I’m like a terrier with a bone. I won’t stop until I’ve sorted out a resident’s problem. I go out everyday into town. It’s all about being seen. People stop me and tell me their problems. Before I know it a 30-minute trip has turned into three hours. But I love it because I’m passionate about helping people. I’m a people person, you see... I’m always there for people. Even when I lost my seat for a short time, I became a community activist, ringing officers I knew to report a problem”.
Councillor Wendy Quigley, Bassetlaw District Council
www.local.gov.uk
“If we can really understand the problem, the answer will come out of it, because the answer is not separate from the problem”.
Jidda Krishnamurti, Indian guru (1895-1986) Facilitation and conflict resolution is nothing new. And it doesn’t need to be large scale or policy-driven. Much of the work that local authorities are currently doing around community cohesion and tension monitoring is an attempt to understand, prevent and respond to actual or potential community conflicts on a comprehensive and consistent basis. As an elected member it is important that you are familiar with this work and adhere to any guidance or protocols that your council has in place. However, many of the community conflicts you are likely to encounter may be small-scale and localised in comparison. They are also likely to be disputes in which early and continued intervention can help to prevent and resolve potential difficulties.
A diversity of views is not necessarily a bad thing
Every community will contain groups of people whose views, and the articulation of these, may frequently differ and be in conflict. It may also be difficult to get different people to reach consensus on some issues where opinions are deeply entrenched. Added to this, individuals and groups may hold different assumptions about problems, solutions or potential courses of action and will seek different types of information to support their case or cause. This is not necessarily a problem, but the reality of living in a democracy.
Most conflicts can be prevented or resolved if the following conditions are in place:
- people are prepared to listen first and talk/act second
- everyone’s contribution to a debate or discussion is respected and valued
- those in dispute are willing to amend their viewpoint in the light of others’ suggestions
- questions are used positively to encourage others to elaborate on their thoughts
- those involved look to build on ideas and identify areas of common ground from which to build rapport.
Situations in which conflict is difficult to resolve
People are only interested in giving their own views and are not willing to listen to others.
Individuals talk as if there is only one course of action.
Discussion is punctuated with threatened or actual aggression/violence.
Questions are used to attack and undermine others.
Discussion and debate is used only to ‘score points’.
There is no willingness or attempt to identify areas of common ground. Facilitation and conflict resolution
Exercise 1 – preventing a ‘storm in a teacup’
Imagine you are faced with the following situation. What could you do to prevent the dispute from escalating into a damaging community conflict?
a) You have been invited to chair a public meeting to discuss views on the location of a new community centre within an area subject to a large regeneration programme – a vocal group from another area (not subject to regeneration) is threatening to dominate the discussions and ‘shout down’ any views expressed.
To prevent conflict occurring, we need to understand why it might occur in the first place. This is about keeping your ear close to the ground – understanding what is happening in your ward, what the hot topics of conversation are and what is keeping people awake at night. According to research by the University of Ulster, the early warning signs of potential conflict can include:
- increases in reported racist incidents, racial harassment and racially motivated crime
- transient populations, both residents and in public spaces
- drug and alcohol activity in public places
- lack of social capital, eg people don’t know or help their neighbours, don’t participate in local activities or organisations or resentment newcomers, particularly those from diverse backgrounds
- increases in violent offences
- increases in criminal damage.
Most of all this is about listening to your constituents and identifying when potential disputes are likely to erupt. Clarity at this stage can enable you to take some early action to prevent wider community conflict. Your role in preventing and resolving disputes
As a ward member you may be able to take action to solve many of the problems facing your community. However, it is unlikely that you can act alone to resolve all areas of potential dispute. Even if you could, your action alone might be damaging to community relations. Sometimes people need to solve their own problems and resolve their own issues. In this situation, your role is more about facilitation: bringing people together; helping to build trust and understanding; speaking up for those who may be largely unheard; sharing relevant information; and ensuring that all views are respected.
Most conflict resolution is likely to be done in face to face discussions and meetings, although you may also be required to act as a ‘go-between’ in preventing and resolving disputes between groups that refuse to meet or interact directly. In either case, you key tasks are likely to include:
- **Listening** – actively finding out what people think and want through surveys or dialogue.
- **Questioning** – using sympathetic questioning to get to the ‘heart of an issue’, to generate thoughts and ideas and to challenge extreme views, uninformed opinions and misleading information.
- **Advocacy** – ensuring that local voices are heard when issues are debated and decisions are taken. This can often involve speaking up for ‘seldom heard’ groups whose views may be unspoken, under-represented or frequently ignored.
- **Facilitating** – helping individuals and groups to come together to discuss issues affecting them, to debate different points of view and to reach consensus on possible solutions.
- **Sharing information** – talking to people and providing information in plain English to enable them to understand the issues under dispute, eg avoiding the use of council jargon and technical or legalistic language.
Alongside this, it is important to recognise that as a ward member you have the ability to influence greatly how people behave in situations where emotions may be running high by demonstrating:
- energy and enthusiasm
- a calm, even tempered, disposition
- an ability to be flexible and adaptable to different people and situations
- strong listening and observation skills
- an ability to act impartially or with neutrality
- self-confidence and gravitas.
Facilitation
“The act of assisting or making easier the progress or improvement in something” Exercise 2 – understanding the source of potential conflict
Consider the case study below. How could this ward member have improved his approach to understanding the source of potential conflict?
a) Bob Charmers represents a rural ward in a small shire district area. Every two months he attends a public meeting in a village hall where his constituents can raise issues of local concern. In recent weeks, Bob has received a large number of letters, e-mails and telephone calls from angry residents, who are concerned about an increase in anti-social behaviour close to the site of an unauthorised camp of New Age Travellers in the ward. His response is to ask the residents to raise the issue at the next village hall meeting. In the meantime, he fires off a couple of quick e-mails to the Director of Environmental Services asking her if she can do anything to move the Travellers on. When Bob attends the subsequent village hall meeting, matters have escalated to a serious level. Local police officers have made a number of arrests following a wide range of incidents including assault, arson and criminal damage. The source of the trouble appears to have been a small group of teenagers from a local housing estate who have sought to use violence and intimidation in an attempt to evict the Travellers. Bob’s meeting is attended by both local residents and members of the travelling community – both want a peaceful resolution to the problems and want Bob to help. Resolving conflicts
Bringing people together
Managing any conflicts that have arisen will require you to share information about what has occurred and make efforts to bring people together for some form of resolution. If trust has not broken down completely and the conflict has not yet got out of hand, there is obvious merit in bringing together the widest range of interested groups at a public meeting.
An earlier workbook in this series on chairing skills can provide you with good ideas on planning such a public meeting and the key skills of a chair in creating the right tone and style for the meeting, encouraging contributions from people and enabling decisions to be reached.
Having brought people together, it is likely that in the first instance people will want to raise their concerns and may be initially reluctant to move too quickly to discuss what should be done to address them. There is some value in letting people air their differences, but only if the discussion is managed to prevent tempers flaring and getting out of hand. It may be that in a first meeting, the best outcome you can hope for is to get people to agree to meet and talk again. In this sense, the meeting should be seen as the start of conflict resolution and not an end in itself.
Guidance on public meetings
The LG Improvement and Development website contains a feature on holding public meetings and provides useful advice on how to encourage people to turn up, choose a suitable venue, make a good start, keep control and get the most from your meeting.
http://tinyurl.com/blsyhk8
Your role as a facilitator will be crucial in helping people to resolve their difficulties. Tactics and approaches that can help in this respect will include:
- Setting a positive tone and modelling the ‘norms’ for group interaction.
- Being yourself, without defensiveness or hidden agendas, and sharing your experiences and feelings to establish empathy.
- Describing what you see rather than being judgemental, eg “on the basis of what you’ve said, you don’t look to be supportive…”
- Being empathetic – showing you understand people’s situation, needs and feelings, ie trying not to give advice, judgements or interpretations. • Maintaining your assertiveness, but avoiding displays of unnecessary emotion (weakness or aggression) and unhelpful behaviours, eg irritators (eg “I think what he has said is very reasonable”), immediate counter-attacks and talking over the top of people.
• Keeping people and problems separate, ie recognise that in many cases other people are not just ‘being difficult’ – real and valid differences can lie behind conflicting positions. By separating the problem from the person, real issues can be debated without damaging relationships.
• Encouraging people to explore options together and be open to the idea that a ‘third way’ may exist.
• Listening first and talking second – to facilitate any form of resolution, you must first understand where different people are coming from.
• Focusing on getting the support of the ‘early adopters’, ie there will usually be a proportion of people in any group who are open to new ideas or new ways of doing things. Their support can often be influential in encouraging the more resistant to come forward, over time, in support of a resolution.
Exercise 3 – effective facilitation of community conflicts
Imagine you are facilitating the following public meeting. What tactics could you employ to assist in bringing people together and resolving their disputes:
a) A mixed group of older and younger people who have come together to discuss the issue of escalating street violence on a housing estate.
Reflect on your answers. Lots of work could clearly be done in planning and setting up the meeting before people arrive, eg ensuring that all interested parties are invited, clarifying the purpose of the meeting and ensuring that the layout of any tables and chairs is conducive to open discussion. Your role in setting the right tone for the meeting will be vital. Perhaps you could give a short introduction, setting out the various concerns (without being judgemental) and emphasising that you are keen to explore areas of common ground. As the discussions unfold, you will need to use your facilitation skills in encouraging good debate, marginalising unhelpful contributions/behaviour and building trust and rapport with those present. As we will see later, this is about striving for a ‘win-win’ resolution throughout the process. Good facilitation will require you to understand some of the fundamental principles involved in resolving disputes (see text box). You should also consider what the most appropriate focus should be for the public meeting before bringing people together. For example:
- to facilitate communication between parties in conflict when levels of antagonism make normal communication difficult or impossible
- to identify the causes of conflict on a joint basis
- to create a safe environment for participants to share their assumptions and explore possible solutions.
- to encourage people to identify common ground and, if differences persist, to encourage empathy about other people’s perspectives.
Of course in some situations you may wish to concentrate on all four aspects, but practically it may be as well to limit your focus in any one meeting to one or two clear objectives. Concentrating on building the dialogue, trust and confidence of the group may well be more important than trying to resolve their difficulties in one quick hit.
Getting those involved in different sides of a dispute to agree on areas of common ground is the key challenge you are likely to face in facilitation and conflict resolution. For some groups, the idea of finding mutually acceptable solutions may be a completely new experience for them – particularly if the dispute has a long history and opinions are suitably entrenched.
**Conflict resolution: fundamental principles**
- Conflict is not inherently destructive, but a normal aspect of any vibrant community. The danger of viewing conflict as inherently negative is that it attempts to avoid or suppress it at all costs and problems are left to fester.
- A thorough and comprehensive analysis of the causes, conditions and manifestations of the conflict taking all of the different perceptions and perspectives seriously should inform conflict resolution activities. Superficial and one-sided assumptions inevitably lead to counter-productive interventions.
- Conflict resolution processes should be inclusive of all parties that are involved.
- Conflict resolution activities should take place with the consent of and preferably at the invitation of the various protagonists.
- The mediators or other third parties should be non-partisan and unbiased in the relationship with the disputing parties.
*Taken from ‘Community Conflict: Causes and Action’, Lemos & Crane, 2004* Facilitating an agreement
Your approach to facilitation can help or hinder any attempt at conflict resolution. Having planned the meeting and helped to set the tone and style of the ensuing discussions, your key tasks are to manage the debate and use a suitable questioning approach to probe, test and challenge others to get to the nub of the issues in dispute. In this respect, questioning is a powerful and essential tool, enabling you to:
- get to the ‘heart of the matter’
- gather evidence and clarify and expand on initial views or early information
- elicit information without making respondents feel intimidated or prejudged
- facilitate inclusion, buy-in and ownership of problems and build rapport with people.
Other workbooks in this series can provide you with more detailed information on effective questioning techniques.
The process of conflict resolution will also require you to manage the personalities involved. People respond in different, sometimes unpredictable, ways when trying to convince others of their point of view. This is true enough in one to one situations, but is particularly so in group meetings.
Effective questioning
To resolve a conflict you should use a range of questioning techniques:
**Closed questions** – direct questions that require a one word answer, eg ‘yes’ or ‘no’.
**Open questions** – the ‘how’, ‘why’ and ‘what’ type of questions that require a more expansive response.
**Leading/limiting questions** – questions designed to limit the range of possible answers, eg ‘Is it true that…?’
**Soft commands** – prompts which sound like questions to elicit information, eg ‘Perhaps you could explain…’
**Paraphrasing/summarising** – repeating what you have heard and asking for a confirmation of accuracy. Recognising that people often behave differently in groups can help you, tactically, to be more effective in resolving disputes. Much of this is about watching and listening to group behaviour and exercising your own judgement about when to intervene and when to sit back as discussions unfold and people exchange views or come into conflict. For example:
- Who contributes the most and least to the discussion – are they aware of it and could you challenge them?
- Who are the silent people – is their silence about dissent or fear and could your intervention encourage them to be more vocal?
- What is the atmosphere in the group – could you mediate to create more congenial conditions?
- Have the discussions reached a sticking point – could you broker some negotiation or compromise to move things forward?
- Does anybody impose their views on others – could you ask for others’ opinions to challenge this?
- Who are the rebels, bullies, critics and scapegoats – can you employ different tactics to deal with each?
In dispute situations, people will often adopt a preferred style or approach to get what they want.
______________________________________________________________________
**Exercise 4 – dealing with the personalities**
Imagine you are facilitating a public meeting to discuss why there have been problems in community relations between the settled community in your ward and a newly-arriving community of refugees from another country. The following characters are at the meeting. What tactics could you employ to deal with each:
a) A noisy and aggressive resident of the settled community who insists on challenging anything said by the refugee community?
b) An elder from the newly-arriving community who has been extremely helpful in calming tensions between different community groups, but who appears reluctant to speak up at a public meeting?
c) A member of an extremist political group who appears to have arrived at the meeting with the sole intention of chanting racist abuse? These are sometimes referred to as the ‘Street Fighter’, ‘Expressive Creator’, ‘Amiable Pacifier’ and ‘Analytical Thinker’ styles. While each may have its merits, and enable a degree of success to be achieved in community conflicts, all have their disadvantages (see text box).
Recognising these different styles can help you as a facilitator to challenge the tactics employed by people. Your objective should be to achieve a ‘win-win’ situation, ie where any resolution is, in effect, a good outcome for all involved. In practice you will learn to separate the people involved from the problems faced and will be soft on people but hard on the issues under dispute. While you will be easy going, friendly, likeable and courteous to all, you will be resolute in continuing to work away on the problem. Tactically you will seek to create options where nobody appears to lose. This can be done by working to get people away from positions taken because of their personality styles, so that they can concentrate on interests.
Other facilitation tactics will help in achieving a ‘win-win’ resolution. For example:
- questioning rather than talking
- listening instead of interrupting
- summarising rather than diluting arguments
- identifying and building on common ground as opposed to point-scoring, attacking or blaming
- emphasising areas of agreement instead of areas of dispute
- building on ideas rather than continuous counter proposals
- describing your feelings in preference to the use of irritators, eg ‘with respect’ and ‘frankly’ etc.
A guide to dispute styles
**Street fighter** – their goal is clear – they want to win. Their approach can be intimidating and they will scare people into agreement by emphasising that only their solution will work. They may come across as hard and domineering and may tend to dig themselves into a position. Determined to get what they want, they may find it hard to budge – even when this is the sensible thing to do.
**Expressive creator** – their goal is to influence other people. In approach, they will try to inspire others and will enjoy trying to sway others. They may come across as excitable and in their enthusiasm to change other people’s minds may not be sensitive to what is really going on in the meeting.
**Amiable pacifier** – their goal is agreement and they will generally believe that if they can get everyone to agree on something, everything else will fall into place. In approach they will focus on developing relationships with others but may be seen as being soft and giving in too easily.
**Analytical thinker** – their goal is to have order at the meeting and they are likely to believe that adhering to formal procedures will produce a result. In approach they will ignore relationships and focus on facts. They may be perceived as detached from the human dimensions of the conflict and too process-driven. Having achieved an outcome that is agreed by all parties, the final key step is to summarise what has been resolved. This ensures that everyone is made aware of what has been discussed and what is being proposed. At this stage it may be appropriate to ‘park’ certain issues that the meeting has failed to agree on, so that these do not scupper an agreement on the more substantive points under discussion. Some further action should be identified, however, to revisit these matters at a future date, eg possibly at a subsequent meeting. Wherever possible you should follow up the meeting with a written summary of the resolved matters so that everyone remains clear about the way forward. In some cases this may be best done by drawing up a formal ‘resolution agreement’.
The use of mediation
In most cases – as a ward member and community leader – you will be ideally placed to act as the facilitator in resolving community conflicts. However, there may well be situations where the nature of the dispute, the problems faced, or personalities involved make your involvement inappropriate or inadvisable (see text box on page 5). In these situations you should consider the use of an independent mediator.
Mediation has been used with varying degrees of success in many different kinds of conflict, including interpersonal, family, industrial relations, community, environmental and international disputes. Mediation involves interviewing all interested parties individually before bringing representatives of the opposing groups together to move the situation forward and find a resolution. In most cases a trained and experienced mediator is the key to success.
Mediation
In mediation, an independent third party (the mediator) helps parties with a dispute to try to reach an agreement. The mediator is impartial and manages the process which is usually a face-to-face meeting in three stages:
• working out what your issues are • working out what your options are • working out an agreement.
The most common models of mediation are:
Facilitative – non-directive
Evaluative – makes suggestions
Rights-based – ensures agreement meets statutory rights/legal entitlements
ADRnow http://tinyurl.com/bumglwl Preventing future conflicts
In your day to day role as a ward member there are many ways in which you can work to prevent disputes developing into wider community conflicts. We mentioned earlier in the workbook that much of this is about listening to your constituents and being alert to the problems that are developing in your ward. Other ideas you could consider include:
• Monitoring many of the factors in your ward that may allow conflict to breed (eg environmental degradation, unemployment, weakening community bonds/ties, crime and anti-social behaviour) and ensuring that action is taken to address these wherever possible.
• Providing reassurance to those who may be vulnerable and unable to speak up for themselves.
• Ensuring that partner agencies take action against individuals who threaten the well-being of the area and may provoke community conflict.
• Helping to build coalitions between different community groups, voluntary sector agencies and statutory organisations to strengthen community ties, build trust and develop social capital.
• Making use of the Community Call for Action (CCfA) enshrined with the Police and Justice Act (2006). This enables ward members to raise, on behalf of local people, matters relating to community safety. Where a satisfactory solution cannot be negotiated, members are able to refer issues to their overview and scrutiny committee(s) for consideration. This facility might be useful in helping to prevent community conflicts. A final word
Social research often highlights that there are more neighbourhoods experiencing community conflict than is commonly assumed. It is often a highly localised phenomenon that is practically invisible except to those living in the middle of it.
While the dynamics of many community disputes can be complex and often obscure, it is clear that the use of facilitation and conflict resolution to establish the common ground between people can be enormously beneficial in preventing as escalation of tensions and the fermentation of wider community conflicts. In most cases this task can be carried out highly effectively by ward members in their role as community leaders.
“Social psychological research on interdependence reveals that when people believe that they need each other, they tend to relinquish their initial prejudices and stereotypes and join in programmes that foster mutual interaction and co-operation. The implication is that urban leaders, especially political leaders, should work to create situations that foster feelings of interdependence, situations that enhance co-operation, not competition”
W J Wilson, ‘The Roots of Racial Tension’, 2003. Where do you go from here?
Look back over the material contained in earlier sections of this workbook and consider the following:
a) What key action points can you identify to improve the way you facilitate group discussions and resolve real or potential conflicts, ie what three or four things might you start doing, keep doing or stop doing?
b) Have you identified any gaps in your knowledge or shortcomings in your personal skills? If so, please set these out below and identify how any further training or development might help you, eg further reading/research, attending courses, coaching, mentoring, work shadowing etc. Appendix A – sources of further information
Printed publications A Councillor’s Guide 2012/2013 www.local.gov.uk
‘Understanding and monitoring tension and conflict in local communities Second Edition’, and ‘Tension Monitoring Toolkit’, Institute of Community Cohesion www.cohesioninstitute.org.uk
‘Community Conflict: Causes and Action’, Lemos & Crane, Housing Corporation www.lemosandcrane.co.uk
‘Dispute Resolution Toolkit’, Housing Ombudsman Service/Housing Corporation/ Age Concern/Compas@TPAS www.tpas.org.uk
‘Understanding and Engaging Deprived Communities’, Home Office www.ligali.org
‘A Look at Community Mediation in the UK’, and ‘Neighbourhood Taskforces A Tool for Dealing with Conflict in Communities’, The Young Foundation www.youngfoundation.org
‘Neighbourhood Partnership guide’ available on the National Policing Improvement Agency website www.npia.police.uk
Useful websites www.adrnow.org.uk ADR – appropriate dispute resolution – includes mediation, arbitration and conciliation. ADRnow is an information website providing an overview of ADR schemes in the UK and a directory of provider organisations.
www.ageuk.org.uk Housing advice service offered by AgeUK Advice Line on 0800 169 6565
www.adviceguide.org.uk Adviceguide is an online help service from the Citizens Advice Bureau.
www.local.gov.uk The Local Government Association website which is an invaluable source of help and advice for all those in local government.
www.youngfoundation.org The Young Foundation undertakes research to identify and understand social needs and then develops practical initiatives and institutions to address them.
www.crimeconcernuk.org The Crime Concern website contains publications and training resources.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2593-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 21,
"total-input-tokens": 38156,
"total-output-tokens": 7540,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
57,
1
],
[
57,
1031,
2
],
[
1031,
2514,
3
],
[
2514,
3527,
4
],
[
3527,
5779,
5
],
[
5779,
8077,
6
],
[
8077,
9681,
7
],
[
9681,
12107,
8
],
[
12107,
13579,
9
],
[
13579,
15795,
10
],
[
15795,
18089,
11
],
[
18089,
20508,
12
],
[
20508,
22274,
13
],
[
22274,
24220,
14
],
[
24220,
27108,
15
],
[
27108,
29324,
16
],
[
29324,
30814,
17
],
[
30814,
31992,
18
],
[
31992,
32622,
19
],
[
32622,
34352,
20
],
[
34352,
34352,
21
]
]
} |
60b3e818f3182373436dc3bfed95a462bdcd19a0 | The National Archives
Education Service
1833 Factory Act
Did it solve the problems of children in factories?
Illustrated London News - ZPER 34/19 Introduction
Lesson at a Glance
Suitable For: KS3
Time Period: Empire and Industry 1750-1850
Curriculum Link: Ideas, political power, industry and empire: Britain, 1745-1901
➢ Britain as the first industrial nation – the impact on society. ➢ Party politics, extension of the franchise and social reform.
Learning Objective: To explain how successful the 1833 Factory Act was at solving the problems of children in factories.
Resources needed: Printed sources, pens
Extension Tasks available: Yes – see Teacher’s notes
The Factory Act
In 1833 the Government passed a Factory Act to improve conditions for children working in factories. Young children were working very long hours in workplaces where conditions were often terrible. The basic act was as follows:
- no child workers under nine years of age
- employers must have an age certificate for their child workers
- children of 9-13 years to work no more than nine hours a day
- children of 13-18 years to work no more than 12 hours a day
- children are not to work at night
- two hours schooling each day for children
- four factory inspectors appointed to enforce the law
However, the passing of this act did not mean that the mistreatment of children stopped overnight.
Using these sources, investigate how far the act had solved the problems of child labour.
Contents:
Background: ................................................................. 3 Teacher’s notes: ............................................................ 4 Source One: ................................................................. 5 Source Two: ................................................................. 6 Source Two (Transcript): ............................................... 7 Source Three: ............................................................. 8 Source Four: ............................................................... 9
This resource was produced using documents from the collections of The National Archives. It can be freely modified and reproduced for use in the classroom only. As the Industrial Revolution gathered pace thousands of factories sprang up all over the country. There were no laws relating to the running of factories as there had been no need for them before. As a result, dangerous machinery was used that could, and frequently did, cause serious injuries to workers. To add to these dangers, people were required to work incredibly long hours – often through the night. Perhaps one of the worst features of this new industrial age was the use of child labour. Very young children worked extremely long hours and could be severely punished for any mistakes. Arriving late for work could lead to a large fine and possibly a beating. Dozing at a machine could result in the accidental loss of a limb.
People began to realise how bad these conditions were in many factories and started to campaign for improvements. There was a lot of resistance from factory owners who felt it would slow down the running of their factories and make their products more expensive. Many people also did not like the government interfering in their lives. Some parents, for instance, needed their children to go out to work from a young age, as they needed the money to help feed the family.
Not all factory owners kept their workers in bad conditions however. Robert Owen, who owned a cotton mill in Lanark, Scotland, built the village of New Lanark for his workers. Here they had access to schools, doctors and there was a house for each family who worked in his mills.
By 1833, the Government passed what was to be the first of many acts dealing with working conditions and hours. At first, there was limited power to enforce these acts but as the century progressed the rules were enforced more strictly. Nonetheless, the hours and working conditions were still very tough by today’s standards, and no rules were in place to protect adult male workers.
Listed below are details of the legislation (laws) that was introduced to improve working conditions in factories.
| Date | Industry | Details of law | |------|----------|----------------| | 1833 | Textiles | No child workers under nine years\
Reduced hours for children 9-13 years\
Two hours schooling each day for children\
Four factory inspectors appointed | | 1844 | Textiles | Children 8-13 years could work six half-hours a day\
Reduced hours for women (12) and no night work | | 1847 | Textiles | Women and children under 18 years of age could not work more than ten hours a day | | 1867 | All Industries | Previous rules applied to workhouses if more than five workers employed | | 1901 | All Industries | Minimum age raised to 12 years |
Useful links: New Lanark\
Site with photographs and information about Robert Owen’s Mill.\
(http://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/lanark/newlanark/index.html) This lesson provides pupils with the opportunity to arrive at a conclusion based upon evidence. Pupils could also be encouraged to look at the evidence with a critical approach.
Tasks:
**Source One:** This is an extract from a Factory Inspectors Report (1836).
- Who gave the evidence to the factory inspector?
- Work out how many hours (not including breaks), the boys are reported to have worked without stopping
- Which parts of the new Factory Act have been broken?
- What does the tone of the letter tell us about what the factory inspectors thought about the firm Taylor, Ibbotson & Co?
- Having studied this source, would you be right to conclude that the 1833 Factory Act did nothing to solve the problems of child workers? Explain your answer.
**Source Two:** This is a piece of a document detailing which companies broke the law.
- What is the most common offence recorded?
- Work out how much is fined for the different offences
- By looking at the fines, which offence is regarded as the most serious?
- How effective was the 1833 Factory Act? Explain your answer. (Hint: is the number of convictions a good or bad sign?)
**Source Three:** This is a photograph of workers in a factory in 1903.
- What kind of factory is the boy working in?
- How old do you think he is?
- Write a list of all the dangers you can see in the factory and what you think could be done to improve them
- This photograph is from 1903, 70 years after the first Factory Act. Explain whether you think work in the factory had improved for child workers by this time
- Is the illustration at the top of this page and this photograph reliable evidence of working conditions in a factory? Give reasons for your answer.
**Suggested activities:**
- You are one of the four factory inspectors in 1836 trying to enforce the Factory Act. You have seen the evidence of abuse of the law and you are unhappy with the present system. Write a letter to the Home Secretary suggesting ways to improve the law and better methods of enforcing it.
- Design a poster to campaign against, or for, child labour in the factories.
- Have a class debate on child labour with half of the class arguing for child labour.
**Extension Questions:**
- How reliable is this evidence regarding the success of the 1833 Factory Act?
- What other evidence would you like see to help you make a decision? Source One - Factory Inspectors Report (1836).
Extract from a Factory Inspectors report – British Parliamentary Papers (1836) No 353
My Lord, in the case of Taylor, Ibbotson & Co. I took the evidence from the mouths of the boys themselves. They stated to me that they commenced working on Friday morning, the 27th of May last, at six A.M., and that, with the exception of meal hours and one hour at midnight extra, they did not cease working till four o’clock on Saturday evening, having been two days and a night thus engaged. Believing the case scarcely possible, I asked every boy the same questions, and from each received the same answers. I then went into the house to look at the time book, and, in the presence of one of the masters, referred to the cruelty of the case, and stated that I should certainly punish it with all the severity in my power. Mr Rayner, the certificating surgeon of Bastile, was with me at the time.
1. Who gave the evidence to the factory inspector?
2. Work out how many hours (not including breaks), the boys are reported to have worked without stopping
3. Which parts of the new Factory Act have been broken?
4. What does the tone of the letter tell us about what the factory inspectors thought about the firm Taylor, Ibbotson & Co?
5. Having studied this source, would you be right to conclude that the 1833 Factory Act did nothing to solve the problems of child workers? Explain your answer
Transcript
My Lord, in the case of Taylor, Ibbotson & Co. I took the evidence from the mouths of the boys themselves. They stated to me that they commenced working on Friday morning, the 27th of May last, at six A.M., and that, with the exception of meal hours and one hour at midnight extra, they did not cease working till four o’clock on Saturday evening, having been two days and a night thus engaged. Believing the case scarcely possible, I asked every boy the same questions, and from each received the same answers. I then went into the house to look at the time book, and, in the presence of one of the masters, referred to the cruelty of the case, and stated that I should certainly punish it with all the severity in my power. Mr Rayner, the certificating surgeon of Bastile, was with me at the time. This is a piece of a document detailing which companies broke the law.
1. What is the most common offence recorded?
2. Work out how much is fined for the different offences
3. By looking at the fines, which offence is regarded as the most serious?
4. How effective was the 1833 Factory Act? Explain your answer. (Hint: is the number of convictions a good or bad sign?)
## Source Two - Transcript
Transcript of an extract from the Reports of Inspectors of Factories (No 3390)
| Date | Names and Addresses of Persons summoned. | Names of the Magistrates who heard the Case, and place of Hearing. | Nature of the Offence. | Amount of Penalty. | Amount of Costs. | Remarks | |------------|------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------|--------------------|------------------|----------------------------------------------| | 1862 Sept 20 | Mary Jones, Courtgwillym, near Bridgend, Glamorganshire | Richard Franklyn and Charles Knight, Esqrs., and Captain Quin; Town Hall, Bridgend. | Informations laid by Mr. Buller. Employing three young persons after 6p.m. | £ s. d. 1 0 0 | £ s. d. 1 0 0 | Two cases withdrawn on payment of costs. | | " 24 | John Jones, Forest Factory, near Newbridge, Glamorganshire | William Perkins, Esq., and the Rev. Evan Morgan; Newbridge, Glamorganshire. | Employing three young persons and one female (adult) after 6p.m. | 1 0 0 | 1 1 0 3 | Three cases withdrawn on payment of costs. | | " 26 | William Llewellyn, Lamb and Flag Factory, Glynneath near Neath | Ilowel Gwyn and Griffith Llewellyn, Esqrs.; Town Hall, Neath | Employing three young persons and two children after 6p.m. | 2 0 0 | 3 9 0 | Four cases withdrawn on payment of costs. | | Oct.1 | John Howell, Mynyddislwyn, near Blackwood, Monmouthshire. | Frederick Levick, Esq., and the Rev. Edward Leigh: Tredegar, Monmouthshire. | Employing four young persons after 2 p.m. on Saturday. | 1 0 0 | 2 1 5 0 | Three cases withdrawn on payment of costs. | | " 8 | Samuel P, Harris, Glyn Gwenffrwd, near Abergavenny, Monmouthshire. | The Honourable W.P. Rodney, Rev. James Farquhar, W.W. Manning and Thomas Davis, Esqrs.; Town Hall, Abergavenny | Employing two young persons and two children after 2p.m. on Saturday | - - - | 1 1 4 0 | Withdrawn on payment of costs | | July 21 | William Kirk, Burnley. | Thomas Hordern Whittaker and John Neels Esqrs.; Burnley | Employing two young persons without surgical certificates | 3 0 0 | 1 0 0 | One summons withdrawn on payment of costs, in consideration of the state of trade |
1. What kind of factory is the boy working in?
2. How old do you think he is?
3. Write a list of all the dangers you can see in the factory and what you think could be done to improve them
4. This photograph is from 1903, 70 years after the first Factory Act. Explain whether you think work in the factory had improved for child workers by this time Are the illustration on this page and the photograph in Source Three reliable evidence of working conditions in a factory? Give reasons for your answer.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2594-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 9,
"total-input-tokens": 17275,
"total-output-tokens": 3332,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
150,
1
],
[
150,
2208,
2
],
[
2208,
5000,
3
],
[
5000,
7361,
4
],
[
7361,
9610,
5
],
[
9610,
9983,
6
],
[
9983,
12277,
7
],
[
12277,
12630,
8
],
[
12630,
12782,
9
]
]
} |
bac1ea27696dbe356cab62b2134fc311f1713856 | Political Proportionality at Council Meetings
With a growing number of Independent and smaller party members sitting on councils, and more authorities moving towards the committee system of governance, there is a question of entitlement in committee seat allocation.
Duty to allocate seats to political groups
The relevant legislation regarding the allocation of seats is Section 15 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989. The Act states that you can agree allocations outside the usual proportionality requirements provided no member votes against them.
Allocation of seats by a Council must give effect to the following principles set out in the Act (1989). The principles have to be applied in priority order as follows:
(a) that not all the seats are allocated to the same political group; (b) that the majority of seats are allocated to a particular political group if the number of persons belonging to that group are a majority of the authority’s membership; (c) subject to (a) and (b) above, that the total number of all seats of the ordinary committees allocated to each particular political group reflects the group’s proportion to the membership of the authority; (d) subject to (a) – (c) above, that the number of seats allocated to a particular political group reflects that group’s proportion of the membership of the authority.
A point of ambiguity in the legislation is that it only refers to ‘political groups’. It has often been interpreted to imply that solo Independent councillors and councillors who do not sit in groups (eg a solo Conservative Councillor) should be excluded from committee proportionality calculations and are not entitled to any seats. However choosing to exclude members that are not in a group can alter the political balance of council committees, therefore many Councils will opt to offer committee seats to Councillors that do not sit in a group.
The most common way to calculate proportionality is to take the approach of offering each councillor $1/X$ seats on committees across all committees, where $X =$ the number of Councillors on the Council. It is up to groups to decide how to share out their seats amongst themselves. This way, individual members would usually be entitled to a proportional seat (or two) on a committee. For example, if there were 40 Councillors at an authority made up of two parties and a solo Independent Councillor, and there were 10 seats on 8 committees (80 seats) then the Independent councillor could be offered 1/40 of the seats - a seat on two of the committees. The decision of which committees those seats are on falls with the majority group.
If a council insists that the legislation refers to ‘groups’ members may choose to join up with others in a similar position and form a group, even if purely for the purposes of committee places.
**What if a member changes political affiliation?**
A member should have formally resigned from their party, and their change of party doesn’t need Council consent. A councillor ‘crossing the floor’ can affect political proportionality on the committee(s) they sit on and will likely lead to a review of the allocation of seats. However, unless the council constitution states otherwise, they remain a member of the committee(s) until committee seat allocation is reviewed by Council or parent committee.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2595-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 4212,
"total-output-tokens": 748,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
2291,
1
],
[
2291,
3346,
2
]
]
} |
7a32552b7d16b8d68a3682f47c5fddd489bc8baf | Factors Influencing Access to Agricultural Input Subsidy Coupons in Malawi
Ephraim W. Chirwa†, Mirriam Matita‡ and Andrew Dorward+++
December 2011 Abstract
Since the 2005/06 agricultural season, the government of Malawi has been implementing a targeted agricultural input subsidy programme through the provision of fertilizers and maize seeds to smallholder farmers at subsidized prices. This paper analyses the factors that influence access to agricultural input subsidies in Malawi. The results show that vulnerable households such as the poor and elderly-headed are less likely to receive fertilizer coupons and receive less of the subsidized fertilizers. Households with larger parcels of land and those who sell part of their produce (commercialized) are more likely to receive coupons and also tend to acquire more fertilizers. Use of open meetings in the allocation of coupons tends to favour the poor and the poor receive more fertilizer compared with other alternative ways of allocating coupons. We also find a positive relation between participation in other social safety nets and access to subsidized fertilizer coupons, suggesting that households with multiple access to different types of social protection programmes are not excluded from the input subsidy programme by virtue of benefiting from other social protection programmes.
1. Introduction
The agricultural sector in Malawi is dominated by smallholder farmers mostly engaged in subsistence farming of the main staple crop, maize. Smallholder farmers devote almost 70 percent of their land to maize cultivation, and maize availability in the country defines the food security situation of the country. Smallholder agriculture in Malawi has been characterized by low productivity, low technology and labour intensity. The low productivity in smallholder agriculture has been attributed to loss in soil fertility, low application of inorganic fertilizers and traditional low technology rain-fed farming systems. Most of the smallholder farmers are resource-poor and cannot afford to purchase fertilizers at prevailing market prices. It is estimated that 52 percent of the population in Malawi lives below the poverty line, with rural poverty estimated at 55.9 percent (GOM and World Bank 2007). Prices of fertilizers have increased dramatically in recent years (Dorward et al. 2010), and this has created difficulties for rural farmers to acquire fertilizers at prevailing market prices. Smallholder fertilizer consumption in Malawi is low at about 34 kilograms per hectare compared to more than 150 kilograms in the estate sector (GOM and World Bank 2007).
In order to address some of the problems in agriculture and to raise the incomes of the resource poor, the Malawi Agricultural Input Subsidy Programme (MAISP) was first implemented in the 2005/06 agricultural season following a poor harvest season and a high maize import bill to augment domestic supply in 2004/05 agricultural season. In 2008/09, the MAISP was in its fourth year of implementation, with changes in the scale, scope and ways of implementation. The MAISP is largely financed by the government, with donor support being in form of overall budgetary support. The MAISP is designed as a targeted input subsidy programme, targeting smallholder farmers with land but who cannot afford to purchase inputs at market rates. The target is 2.8 million farming households identified by the Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security, out of an estimated 3.4 farming households. The size of the MAISP has increased from 132,000 tonnes in 2005/06 to 216,000 tonnes in 2007/08. This has also meant that the cost of the subsidy has escalated from MK5.1 billion (2.1 percent of GDP) in 2005/6 to MK16.3 billion (3.4 percent of GDP) in 2007/08 and to MK31 billion (5.5 percent of GDP) in 2008/09 (Dorward et al. 2010). The fertilizer subsidy per farmer increased from 64 percent to 79 percent of the commercial price in 2005/06 and 2007/08, respectively.
Due to the high poverty rate among the rural population, agricultural input subsidies apart from being an instrument of promoting agricultural growth can also be seen as a social protection instrument of ensuring access to inputs, and access and availability of food to vulnerable groups. Dorward et al. (2006) discuss the various strategic ways in which agriculture, agricultural policies and social protection programmes address the problems of vulnerable groups. Four strategic pathways are identified: social protection from agriculture and agricultural growth (such as service delivery, input subsidies and market intervention); social protection for agriculture (insurance, public works through created assets, inputs for work); social protection through agriculture (targeted inputs programmes); and social protection independent of agriculture (conditional or unconditional cash transfers, food aid). One direct way in which input subsidies can provide social protection to the poor is by targeting the poor or by implementing very high subsidies to ensure that the poor are able to access such inputs (Dorward et al. 2006). The input subsidy programme as a productivity enhancing intervention can also provide social protection to the poor and vulnerable households.
This paper investigates factors that determine household access to subsidized fertilizer coupons and how access to subsidy coupons complement other social protection programmes that focus on resource poor farmers. We test the hypothesis that the fertilizer subsidy programme targets the poor and vulnerable households, and hence that the programme offers direct social protection to such households. The paper is organized into five sections. The next section focuses on a brief overview of the design of the agricultural input subsidy programme focussing primarily on targeting and implementation experiences. Section 3 outlines the econometric model of determinants of access, definition of variables and the data used for the analysis. Section 4 presents the results of the econometric analysis and discussion of the results. Finally, section 5 presents concluding remarks. 2. Coupon Allocation and Targeting in the Malawi Agricultural Input Subsidy
The agricultural input subsidy programme aims at promoting access and use of fertilizers among smallholder farmers in order to increase agricultural productivity and food security. According to GOM (2008b) the main objective of the agricultural input subsidy programme is to achieve household food self-sufficiency and increased income through increased food and cash crop production. In order to achieve these objectives, the target was defined as resource-poor Malawians who own a piece of land and are resident in the village, with special consideration to guardians looking after physically challenged persons and vulnerable groups such as child-headed, female-headed or orphan-headed households and households affected by HIV and AIDS (GOM 2008b). Although Dorward et al. (2010) note that the targeting criteria have explicitly placed more emphasis on vulnerable groups, in practice, there are difficulties in the application of these criteria, particularly due to the fact that the targeting criteria remained wide and that the criteria fitted large numbers of households against the available number of coupons allocated for the area.
The agricultural subsidy programme mainly focuses on the subsidization of maize fertilizers and improved maize seeds. However, the scope of coverage of crops under the subsidy programme had varied over time, and in addition to maize included tobacco, tea and coffee fertilizers, legume seeds, cotton seeds and chemicals and maize storage chemicals. The subsidy comes in various packages. Table 1 shows the various packages that have been used in various agricultural seasons by type of crops. A beneficiary household was entitled to either a maize package of fertilizers and seeds, a tobacco package of fertilizers, or a cotton package of chemicals and seeds. In addition, beneficiaries were also entitled to a flexible coupon to enable them purchase legume seeds, maize storage chemicals as well as improved maize seeds. In the 2008/09 season, due to substantial increases in the prices of fertilizers, the fertilizer subsidy also covered smallholder tea and coffee farmers. Tobacco, tea and coffee are the main commercial and export crops in Malawi and there are arguments in favour of and against subsidizing cash crops. For example, those that argue in favour of subsidization of cash crops on one hand contend that subsidization allows greater commercialisation of smallholder farming, and increased incomes from these cash crops can be used to purchase food, particularly when the income increases are widespread among food insecure households. However, most smallholder farmers engaged in cash crops tend to be food secure and the benefits to vulnerable groups of such a policy are limited. On the other hand, those who argue against subsidization of cash crops note that subsidization of cash crops has the most displacement effects and resources therefore may not lead to incremental production necessary to maintain low food prices affordable to vulnerable people (SOAS et al. 2008).
The agricultural input subsidy as a targeted programme has a fixed number of vouchers that have to be distributed to smallholder farmers across the country. In the 2008/09 season, the subsidy was expected to benefit 1.5 million farmers for maize fertilizers, 0.2 million farmers for tobacco fertilizers, 1.9 million farmers for the maize seed subsidy, 0.435 million farmers for the flexible seed subsidy and 0.2 million farmers for cotton seed and chemicals. The total number of farming households was estimated at 3.2 million (GOM 2008a). In the 2008/09 season, there were three stages involved the targeting process: updating a register of all farm households, allocation of coupons to districts and within districts and local (village) processes of selecting beneficiaries.
First, the registration of farmers started in the 2007/08 season and this register was updated in the 2008/09 season between May and August 2008. The register
| Table 1 Malawi Agricultural Subsidy Packages 2005/06 – 2008/09 | |-----------------|-----------------|-----------------| | **Inputs/Crop** | **Maize** | **Tobacco** | **Cotton** | | **Fertilizer** | • 1 bag of 50 kilograms of NPK | • 1 bag 50 kilogram of CAN | – | | | • 1 bag of 50 kilograms of UREA | • 1 bag 50 kilogram of D. Compound | – | | **Seeds** | • 4.5 kilograms of open pollinated varieties (OPV) maize seed | – | • 5 kilograms of acid delinted and treated cotton seed b | | | • 2 kilograms of hybrid seed a | – | – | | **Chemicals** | – | – | • 1 bottle of 50 millilitres of aphicide b | | **Other seeds and chemicals** | • Bean seed (2 kg) b, groundnuts seed (2 kg) b, soybean seeds (2-3 kg) b and pigeon peas seed (2 kg) b, 200 grams bottle of maize storage pesticide c | – | • 2 bottles of 200 millilitres of larvicide b |
**Notes:** a since 2006/07 season, b since 2007/08 season, c since 2008/09 season
**Source:** GOM (2008a; 2008b) formed the basis of allocation of coupons to the districts and within the villages. Secondly, the allocation to districts and within the district is based on maize areas cultivated and number of farm households. Prior to 2007/08 season, there was no registration of farm families and local leaders identified households that benefited from the subsidy programme and the allocation to districts was based on crop (maize) areas under cultivation. Thirdly, the processes of identification of households have changed over time. In 2005/06 through to 2007/08, local leaders and local level Village Development Committees (VDC) were responsible for identifying beneficiaries, but agricultural staff managed the distribution of coupons in 2007/08 season. In 2008/09 season, an open system of identification of beneficiaries (community-based targeting) using the farming households register was introduced in allocation and distribution of coupons while the disbursement of coupons were led by the Ministry of Agriculture staff. There was greater involvement of other stakeholders in the facilitation of these processes including Ministry of Agriculture staff, religious leaders, VDC members, local government, police and civil society representatives.
Table 2 shows the extent to which open meetings were used in coupon allocation and distribution in the 2008/09 agricultural season across regions. It is evident that the open meeting system was used widely in both the allocation and distribution of fertilizer subsidy coupons.
Table 2. Extent of Use of Open Meeting in Allocation and Distribution of Fertilizer Subsidy 2008/09
| Region | Allocation (% of sample) | Distribution (% of sample) | |----------|--------------------------|----------------------------| | North | 88 | 99 | | Central | 71 | 97 | | South | 88 | 95 | | Total | 81 | 97 |
Source: Dorward et al. (2010)
About 81 percent and 96 percent of the households in the sample confirmed that open meetings in allocation and distribution of fertilizer subsidy coupons were held in their communities. The processes were therefore more open, particularly the distribution of fertilizer coupons. Dorward et al. (2010) note that due to the large number of eligible households relative to the number of coupons allocated to the villages, there was an informal system of re-distribution of coupons within the villages after the open meeting, with about 43 percent of the sample confirming that re-distribution took place in the villages.
Targeting is one of the critical elements of the effectiveness of the subsidy and in achieving efficiency in resource use. In an economy where the private marketing system in input markets is functioning, it is important to ensure that the subsidy does not displace commercial sales of fertilizers. In other words, the subsidized fertilizers should be targeted at households that could not have bought fertilizers at the prevailing market prices. Hence, the efficiency of a targeted programme depends on the extent to which errors of inclusion and exclusion can be minimized in the selection of beneficiaries.
According to Coady et al. (2002) errors of inclusion (leakage) occur when the non-poor or unintended households are included in the programme while errors of exclusion (undercoverage) occur when the poor or intended households are not included in the programme. The problems of targeting social programmes are well-documented in the literature and include lack of information, high costs of acquiring information, and social stigma. The literature describes a number of alternative targeting methods in social programmes including using individual/household assessments based on socio-economic data, categorical targeting, self-selection and community-based targeting. These different methods have their own advantages and shortcomings (Morley and Coady 2003). Although more recently community-based targeting has been advocated as a participatory approach to identification of beneficiaries, as Morley and Coady (2003) note there is
Table 3 Mean Attributes of Households by Number of Fertilizer Subsidy Coupons Received, 2008/9
| Fertiliser Coupon numbers per hh | Zero | 0.5 to 1 | 1.5 to 2 | More than 2 | All | Sig. | |---------------------------------|------|----------|----------|-------------|-----|------| | % hhold female headed | 26% | 31% | 24% | 17% | 27% | * | | Owned Area in ha | 1.16 | 1.09 | 1.48 | 2.17 | 1.27| \*\* | | Value durable assets (MK) | 19,621| 15,630 | 20,340 | 28,111 | 18,702| | | Value durable assets (MK) | 18,689| 22,947 | 41,807 | 58,946 | 28,699| | | Total Value livestock & durable assets (MK) | 38,150| 38,098 | 61,590 | 87,058 | 47,025| | | Subjective score of hh food consumption over past 12 months | 1.5 | 1.5 | 1.6 | 1.7 | 1.5 | * | | Subjective score on welfare | 2.3 | 2.2 | 2.5 | 2.8 | 2.3 | \*\* | | Month after harvest that maize ran out | 7.2 | 7.1 | 7.9 | 8.6 | 7.4 | * |
Source: Dorward et al. (2010) Notes: * = one or more differences significant at p=0.05, \*\* = one or more differences significant at 0.01 a danger of elite capture and variable interpretation of the programme beneficiary identification criteria. Dorward et al. (2010) and Chinsinga (2009), in the context of the input subsidy programme, note that the criteria for beneficiary identification remain wide and subject to different interpretations and communities tend to emphasise different vulnerable groups. Similarly, the 20-40 percent displacements of commercial fertilizer in the 2006/07 programme also suggest that households that could afford fertilizers at prevailing market prices were erroneously included in the programme (SOAS et al 2008).
Table 3 shows the characteristics of rural households by the number of coupons for subsidized fertilizer. Although since 2006/7, targeting criteria have placed more explicit emphasis on the provision of coupons to more vulnerable households, the evidence point to the fact that the poor and vulnerable groups are generally marginalized. The number of coupons received per household increases with land size, wealth (represented by value of assets and livestock), welfare and food security. The proportion of female-headed households decreases with the number of coupons received per household.
The difficulties in targeting vulnerable households arise from applying the prescribed targeting criteria. Dorward et al. (2010) note that fundamental difficulties in targeting therefore arise because of ambiguities, tensions and contradictions among different targeting criteria, related to difficulties in clearly establishing measures for applying these criteria, both of these being related to large numbers of households apparently deserving of coupons relative to the number of coupons available. As a result there are many variations in the characteristics of beneficiaries of fertilizer subsidy coupons, and the better off households tend to dominate the vulnerable households.
3. Econometric Model and Data
3.1 Model Specification and Data
Our econometric specification of the determinants of access to subsidized fertilizers uses two definitions of access. The first is receipt of fertilizer coupons whether the household uses it or not to purchase subsidized fertilizers. SOAS et al (2008) estimated a similar model, however, their model focuses on access to subsidized fertilizers – those households that actually used their coupon allocations to purchase fertilizers. The second definition incorporates use of the coupons and measures access in terms of the amount of subsidized fertilizers acquired by the household (SOAS et al 2008). We test the alternative definitions of access using the following empirical model:
[ ASF_i = \\alpha + \\beta HC + \\gamma FC + \\kappa POV + \\lambda X + \\epsilon_i ]
(1)
where for household ( i ), ( ASF_i ) is access to or acquisition of subsidized fertilizers, ( HC ) is a vector of household characteristics including household composition and assets, ( FC ) is a vector of farming characteristics such as land sizes and commercial farming, ( POV ) is a vector of poverty and vulnerability variables, ( X ) is a vector of other control variables and ( \\epsilon ) is the error term. Access to subsidized fertilizer coupons is specified as a dichotomous variable representing receipt of fertilizer coupons, equation (1) is estimated using the probit model. Alternatively, where we use quantity of subsidized fertilizers acquired we estimate equation (1) using a tobit model.
We use data from the 2007/08 and 2008/09 evaluation of the MAISP collected from rural households drawn from all livelihood zones in the country, covering 14 of the 29 districts. The data contains information from 1,982 households. Most of the households are drawn from a panel of households sampled in the 2004/05 Integrated Household Survey, with the rest being replacement households. Although the agricultural input subsidy programme also covers maize and legume seeds and cotton chemicals, the analysis focuses on the fertilizer subsidy which is the largest component of the programme. The data captured information for both 2007/08 and 2008/09 seasons, and we explain access to 2008/09 subsidized fertilizers using 2007/08 characteristics representing an environment prior to the receipt of the subsidy in the reference agricultural season.
3.2 Definition of Variables
The dependent variables in the model are access to fertilizer coupons and quantity of subsidized fertilizers acquired by the household. Access to fertilizer coupons is defined as a dummy variable equal to 1 if at least one member of the household received a fertilizer voucher or coupon in the 2008/09 agricultural season. The quantity of subsidized fertilizers is the total amount of fertilizers in kilograms the household obtained using fertilizer coupons in the 2008/09 agricultural season. The acquisition of subsidized fertilizers using coupons implies use of the coupon to purchase fertilizers, although the farmer may not use all of the fertilizers in a particular season.
We group the explanatory variables into household characteristics, farmer characteristics, poverty and vulnerability variables and other control variables. The household characteristics in our model include age of household head, sex of household head, elderly headed households, household size, number of economically active members of the household and value of durable assets. The age of the household head is measured as number of years while the sex of the household head is represented by a dummy variable equal to 1 if the household head is male, otherwise equal to zero. Our hypothesis is that since female-headed households are singled out as one of the vulnerable groups in the criteria for targeting, we expect that female-headed households are more likely to access subsidized fertilizers. We also include elderly-headed households as one of the vulnerable groups; defined as a dummy variable equal to 1 if the household head is above 65 years of age. Household size in terms of number of adult equivalents or the number of economically active members is included in the model to capture the effects of availability of family labour, which is important for agricultural activities in rural Malawi. The value of durable assets in 2008/09, measured in US dollars, represents the resource base, hence the wealth of the household. Since this indicates affordability, our expectation is that wealthier households are likely to redeem their fertilizer coupons, and are likely to be given priority on account of likely utilization of the subsidy. However, being resource-poor, low values of assets is the main criterion for identification of households and we therefore expect a negative relationship between wealth and access to subsidized fertilizers.
Farm characteristics variables include cultivated land in the 2008/09 season, cultivation of burley tobacco, selling maize in 2008/09 season, selling agricultural produce and acquisition of commercial fertilizers in 2007/08 season. Land cultivated in 2008/09 agricultural season is measured in hectares. Ownership of land is one of the main criteria for allocation of subsidy coupons in combination with resource constraints. Our expectation is that households with more land are more likely to have access to coupons compared to households with no land or small land sizes. Since 2005/06 season until the 2008/09 season, the fertilizer subsidy has also been covering smallholder burley tobacco growers. Ideally, cultivation of a cash crop should enable farmers to procure commercial fertilizers for both cash and food crop production, and access to subsidized fertilizers may potentially crowd-out commercial fertilizer sales. SOAS et al. (2008) find that displacement of commercial sales of fertilizers tends to be higher among tobacco farmers than among maize farmers. Marketing of maize by the household in 2008/09 is captured by a dummy equal to 1 if the household sold some maize. Households that sell maize are potentially net maize sellers and therefore food secure. We also test the role of commercial orientation of farmers, represented by participation in produce markets defined as a dummy variable equal to 1 if the household sold any agricultural output in 2008/09 season. Farmers that can afford purchase of fertilizers at prevailing market prices are unlikely to access subsidized fertilizers. To capture this aspect we include the quantity of commercial fertilizers acquired by the household in the previous season (2007/08). The higher the quantity of commercial fertilizer purchased the less resource-constrained the farmer and the more likely to be excluded in the allocation of the subsidy.
More recently, the targeting guidelines have emphasized recognition of vulnerable households. In this regard, our specification includes a vector of poverty and vulnerability variables which include self-assessed poverty status in the previous season, food consumption adequacy following the previous season’s harvest, and participation in social safety net programmes. The first indicator of poverty and vulnerability is the own assessment of poverty in 2007/08 prior to receipt of fertilizer coupons. This is represented by a dummy variable equal to 1 if the household classified itself as poor in 2007. It is expected that those households that reveal that they are poor are more likely to have access to subsidized inputs. The second indicator of vulnerability is the food security situation of the households. We represent this using a dummy variable equal to 1 if the household revealed that it had adequate or more than adequate food consumption in the past year of the survey (hence following the 2007/08 harvest). Since the programme objective is to achieve self-sufficiency in food, ceteris paribus, food insecure households are expected to have access to subsidized fertilizers. Participation in other social safety nets rather than input subsidies should also indicate vulnerability of households. Participation in other social safety net programmes is represented by a dummy variable equal to 1 if any member of the household participated in other social safety net programmes, otherwise equal to zero. Alternatively, we include participation in public works programmes in which a dummy equal to 1 represents participation in public works programmes. Participation in other social safety nets may also be a potential factor in exclusion of vulnerable groups as the communities or implementers may feel that such households are already benefiting from social assistance.
We also introduce control variables in the model which include household’s participation in the labour market, ownership of a business enterprise, receipt of remittances, receipt of subsidy coupons in the previous season (2007/08), coupon allocation system and regional dummies. Employment, business enterprise and remittances are indicators of household affordability of commercial fertilizers or ability to redeem vouchers. Participation in the labour market is represented by a dummy which is equal to 1 if any member of the household received income from salaried or ganyu employment in the previous season. Households that operate business enterprise, represented by a dummy equal to 1 if any member of the household operated a business enterprise in the 2007/08 season, are more likely to afford fertilizers at market prices. Similarly, receipt of remittances, represented by a dummy equal to 1, improves household ability to purchase commercial fertilizers. We include a dummy variable equal to 1 if the household received subsidy coupons in the previous agricultural season, 2007/08. Since 2007/08, the government introduced the system of registering farm households and an open forum for identification of beneficiaries and allocation of coupons to improve transparency and accountability. Previously, local politicians, traditional leaders and village committees were responsible for allocating coupons; a process which many farmers claimed was characterized by biases and favouritism (SOAS et al. 2008). The effect of the method of coupon allocation is captured by a dummy variable equal to 1 if poor households revealed that an open system of allocating coupons was used in their community. We expect that a more open and transparent system of coupon allocation is likely to favour the poor, hence a positive relationship between access and open forum and poverty. 4. Results and Discussions
4.1 Descriptive Statistics
Table 4 presents descriptive statistics of the variables used in the econometric analysis. The data show that about 70 percent of the sample households received a subsidized fertilizer coupon in the 2008/09 agricultural season. On average, households procured 53.6 kilograms of subsidized fertilizers using the voucher. The sample is also dominated by male-headed households accounting for 74 percent. We also note that about 16 percent of households are headed by the elderly. The sample is mainly rural and most of the households belong to the smallholder category as manifested by ownership of 1 hectare of land under cultivation in the 2008/09 agricultural season. Only 16 percent of households cultivated tobacco and only 33 percent were engaged in crop marketing following the 2008/09 harvest. The fertilizer subsidy focuses on maize that is produced to meet subsistence needs – the low proportion of households that engage in the sale of maize, only 10 percent, reflect the subsistence nature of maize. In 2007/08 season, only 28 percent of households purchased fertilizers at prevailing market prices, but this increased to 40 percent in the 2008/09 season. The prices of fertilizers in early 2007 increased substantially at the international market and consequently raised the domestic price of fertilizers in the 2007/08 agricultural season. Prices of fertilizers fell prior to the 2008/09 agricultural season, and it is not therefore surprising that there has been a 12 percent increase in the proportion of rural farmers that acquired commercial fertilizers. On average households purchased 43 kilograms of commercial fertilizers in 2007/08, but the amount of commercial fertilizer purchased in 2008/09 season only increased to 48 kilograms.
Most of the households ranked themselves as poor (87 percent) the 2007/08, but the proportion decreased to only 83 percent in the 2008/09 season. The self-assessment of poverty may be biased downwards given households’ knowledge about the criteria for accessing the subsidy. However, using some indicator of food security, about 46 percent of households had adequate or more than adequate food consumption following the 2007/08 harvest, which implies that food poverty was about 54 percent. Only 15 percent of the households had access to social safety nets in 2007/08 (this increased to 17 percent in 2008/09). In 2007/08, 59 percent of the households had access to fertilizer coupons. We also note that a significant proportion of households participated in the labour market, operated a business enterprise and/
| Variables | Mean | SD | Min | Max | |-----------|------|-----|-----|-----| | Access to fertilizer coupons in 2008/9 (0/1) | 0.699 | 0.459 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Quantity of subsidized fertilizers acquired 2008/9 (KG) | 53.589 | 49.910 | 0.00 | 600.0 | | Age of household head (years) | 47.133 | 16.063 | 18.00 | 99.00 | | Male headed household (0/1) | 0.736 | 0.441 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Elderly headed household (0/1) | 0.155 | 0.362 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Household size (adult equivalents) | 4.714 | 2.109 | 0.00 | 16.98 | | Value of assets in US dollars in 2008/9 | 165.22 | 632.76 | 0.00 | 18064 | | Cultivated land in hectares in 2008/9 | 0.978 | 0.722 | 0.00 | 6.88 | | Tobacco cultivation in 2008/9 (0/1) | 0.156 | 0.363 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Crop marketing in 2008/9 (0/1) | 0.330 | 0.471 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Maize marketing in 2008/9 (0/1) | 0.101 | 0.302 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Quantity of commercial fertilizers bought in 2007/8 (KG) | 43.02 | 230.43 | 0.00 | 6700 | | Own poverty assessment as poor in 2007/8 (0/1) | 0.865 | 0.342 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Adequate food consumption in 2008/9 (0/1) | 0.462 | 0.499 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Business enterprise in 2007/8 (0/1) | 0.395 | 0.489 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Labour market participation in 2007/8 (0/1) | 0.497 | 0.500 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Remittance receipts in 2007/8 | 0.392 | 0.488 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Access to social safety nets in 2007/8 (0/1) | 0.147 | 0.354 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Access to fertilizer coupons in 2007/8 (0/1) | 0.593 | 0.491 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Open forum allocations 2008/9 and poor 2007/8 (0/1) | 0.709 | 0.454 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Northern region (0/1) | 0.192 | 0.394 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Central region (0/1) | 0.363 | 0.481 | 0.00 | 1.00 | | Southern region (0/1) | 0.446 | 0.497 | 0.00 | 1.00 |
Notes: (0/1) indicates dichotomous variable equal to 1 for the included category, otherwise equal to 0 for the base category. or had received remittances in 2007/08, a season prior to receiving the fertilizer coupons for the 2008/09 season.
4.2 Econometric Results
Table 5 presents probit regression estimates of factors that determined access to subsidized fertilizer coupons in the 2008/09 agricultural season. We report the marginal effects of these factors on the probability of receiving a fertilizer subsidy coupon. Model 1 includes dummies for cultivation of burley tobacco and marketing of maize in the 2008/09 season and excludes the dummy for general agricultural produce marketing. Model 2 excludes tobacco cultivation and maize marketing, instead includes general crop marketing. The models explain about 26–27 percent of the variations as indicated by the Pseudo $R^2$. The Wald $X^2$ statistic shows that we reject the hypotheses that the marginal effects are equal to zero at the 1 percent significance level.
The household characteristics that are significant in explaining household’s receipt of subsidized fertilizer coupons in both model specifications are age of household head, elderly headed households. With respect to age of household head, as the age of household heads increases such households are more likely to receive coupons and the probability of getting a coupon increases by 0.3 percent. However, households that are headed by the elderly (those above 64 years) are unlikely to receive fertilizer coupons and the probability falls by 13 percent. This is contrary to the emphasis on special vulnerable groups that has been placed recently in the targeting criteria for the subsidy programme. It may also be the case that elderly headed households are labour-constrained for farming activities and are least likely to use the coupons in farming.
All the variables representing farming characteristics are statistically significant at the 1 percent level. First, we find a positive relationship between probability of receiving a fertilizer coupon and size of land under
| Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | |------------------------------------------------|------------------|------------------| | Age of household head (years) | 0.0032 | 0.0027 | | Male headed household (0/1)\* | 0.0021 | -0.0032 | | Elderly headed household (0/1)\* | -0.1304 | -0.1226 | | Household size (adult equivalents) | -0.0113 | -0.0075 | | Value of assets in US dollars in 2008/9 | 0.00001 | 0.00001 | | Cultivated land in hectares in 2008/9 | 0.0561 | 0.0624 | | Tobacco cultivation in 2008/9 (0/1)\* | 0.1720 | – | | Maize marketing in 2008/9 (0/1)\* | 0.1126 | – | | Crop marketing in 2008/9 (0/1)\* | – | 0.1011 | | Quantity of commercial fertilizers bought in 2007/8 (KG) | -0.0002 | -0.0001 | | Own poverty assessment as poor in 2007/8 (0/1)\* | -0.0802 | -0.0706 | | Adequate food consumption in 2008/9 (0/1)\* | 0.0202 | 0.0221 | | Business enterprise in 2007/8 (0/1)\* | 0.0051 | 0.0006 | | Labour market participation in 2007/8 (0/1)\* | -0.0411 | -0.0490 | | Remittance receipts in 2007/8 (0/1)\* | 0.0747 | 0.0741 | | Access to social safety nets in 2007/8 (0/1)\* | 0.0704 | 0.0792 | | Access to fertilizer coupons in 2007/8 (0/1)\* | 0.4460 | 0.4515 | | Open forum allocations 2008/9 and poor 2007/8 (0/1)\* | 0.0981 | 0.0854 | | Central region (0/1)\* | -0.0367 | -0.0520 | | Southern region (0/1)\* | -0.0321 | -0.0432 | | Number of observations | 1982 | 1982 | | Wald chi-squared (18) | 517.51 | 518.39 | | Prob > chi-squared | 0.000 | 0.000 | | Pseudo R-squared | 0.2703 | 0.2582 |
Notes: The dependent variable is a dummy variable for access to subsidized fertilizer coupons received in the 2008/09 agricultural season. (\*) $dF/dx$ (marginal effect) is for discrete change of dummy variable from 0 to 1. Robust t-statistics with superscripts a, b and c denote significance at the 1, 5 and 10 percent levels, respectively. cultivation in both models. The results show that a unit increase in land increases the probability of receiving a coupon by 6 percent. The positive relationship is expected since land is one of the main criteria for targeting smallholder farmers. This finding is similar to the results in the 2006/07 study, in which a household with at least 3 hectares of land was 14 percent more likely to receive subsidized fertilizer (SOAS et al. 2008). Secondly, cultivation of tobacco, maize marketing and general produce marketing all increase the probability of receiving fertilizer coupons. Being a smallholder tobacco farmer increases the probability of receiving a fertilizer coupon by as much as 17 percent while those that produce a marketable maize surplus increase the probability of receiving the fertilizer coupons by 11 percent. Similarly, farmers that engage in commercial agriculture – those that sold some crops – are more likely to receive fertilizer coupons and increase the probability of receiving coupons by 10 percent. This implies that fertilizer coupons are likely to go to those smallholder farmers that earn cash incomes from agriculture with the potential to purchase fertilizers at prevailing market prices. Thirdly, we find that households that bought commercial fertilizers in the previous season are less likely to be allocated subsidized fertilizer coupons, and purchase of commercial fertilizers leads to a marginal 0.02 percent reduction in the probability. However, the marginal effect shows that the targeting is not good at excluding those who can afford commercial purchases.
Among the two poverty indicators, only the marginal effects of own assessment of poverty in 2007/08 is statistically significant at the 5 percent level in model 1 and 10 percent level of significance in model 2. The negative relationship between poverty and receipt of coupons shows that households that view themselves as poor are less likely to receive coupons. Poverty reduces the probability of receiving coupons by 8 percent. In the first two years of the subsidy, evidence of cash for coupon redemption was a pre-condition in some communities for households to receive fertilizer coupons (ICL et al. 2007 and SOAS et al. 2008). SOAS et al. (2008) find similar results on the effect of own poverty evaluation on the likelihood of receiving fertilizers, with wealthier households receiving more coupons than the poor households.
Four of the seven other control variables are important determinant of access to fertilizer vouchers. First, we find that participation in the labour market either through salaried or ganyu employment in the 2007/08 season reduced the household’s chances of receiving coupons in the 2008/09 season. The marginal effects of labour market participation are statistically significant at 10 percent and 5 percent level in model 1 and 2, respectively. Labour market participation in the previous season reduces the probability of receiving fertilizer coupons by about 5 percent. This implies that those in salaried employment are excluded as they are capable of purchasing fertilizers at commercial prices and those in ganyu employment maybe those households that do not have adequate land and use their labour resource in ganyu labour. Nonetheless, ganyu labour is the second most important source of cash for redeeming the coupons (SOAS et al. 2008 and Dorward et al. 2010). Secondly, there is a statistically significant positive relationship between remittances and probability of receiving coupons. Receipt of remittances in the previous season increases the probability of receiving coupons by 7.4 percent. Remittances are one of the sources of cash for redemption of coupons and purchase of farm inputs in the rural areas.
Thirdly, we find access to other social safety nets in the previous season to be positively associated with receipt of fertilizer coupons in the 2008/09 season. Participation in safety nets increases the probability of receipt of coupons by about 8 percent. This implies that participants in other social safety nets are not excluded from the fertilizer vouchers, and if safety nets are well targeted then they provide additional information about the vulnerable households in the communities. Some of the social safety nets such as cash-for-work or public works programmes if well coordinated can ease the cash constraint of vulnerable households and enable them to redeem the fertilizer coupons. Fourthly, the results suggest that households that benefited from the subsidy in the previous season were more likely to receive the coupons in the next season. The probability of receiving fertilizer coupons increases by 45 percent for households targeted in the previous season. Finally, it is interesting to note how important open forums for allocating coupons are for poor households. Dorward et al. (2010) and Chinsinga (2009) note that open meetings were used widely in allocation and distribution of coupons in the 2008/09 programme, particularly in the base allocation. Open forums for allocating coupons increase the chance of targeting those that ranked themselves in the poor category by about 10 percent. This suggests that community-based targeting may be superior to allocations that involve traditional leaders and committees as was previously the case in the 2005/06 up to the 2007/08 season.
We present tobit regression estimates of the factors associated with the quantity of subsidized fertilizers acquired by the households in 2008/09 season in Table 6. Although the explanatory power is low, the F-statistics suggest that we reject the null hypothesis that all the parameter estimates are equal to zero. In this model, household characteristics perform poorly, with only age of the household head being statistically significant at the 10 percent level in Model 1. In terms of farming characteristics, we find evidence of the positive relationship between quantity of subsidized fertilizers and land size, tobacco cultivation, maize marketing and general crop marketing, but no evidence of a significant relationship between subsidized fertilizers and commercial fertilizers. The coefficient of cultivated land is statistically significant at the 1 percent level in both models. A unit increase in hectares increases acquisition of subsidized fertilizers by about 13 kilograms. The coefficient of tobacco cultivation is also statistically significant at the 1 percent level, and cultivation of tobacco raises the amount of subsidized fertilizers by 28 kilograms. This implies that on average tobacco farmers received more fertilizers than non-tobacco farmers. Although the policy is one package per household, it appears that tobacco farmers may also have received subsidized fertilizers for maize. Similar to the probit results, households that sold some maize or those that participated in general agricultural produce marketing tended to have acquired more subsidized fertilizers, with the coefficients being statistically significant at the 1 percent level. We find no statistically significant relationship between quantity of commercial fertilizers and the amount of subsidized fertilizers, suggesting that the programme also targets households that can afford commercial fertilizers leading to displacement of commercial sales.
There is a significant negative relationship between poverty and the quantity of subsidized fertilizers received by the households. Households that rank themselves in the poor category are likely to receive about 15 kilograms less than households in the non-poor category. There is a tendency for the subsidized fertilizers to reach the better-off farmers. This result is reinforced by the significant positive relationship between adequacy in food consumption and amount of subsidized fertilizers. Households that are food secure tend to receive 7 kilograms more subsidized fertilizers than food insecure households.
The coefficient of participation in the labour market is negative and statistically significant at the 1 percent level in both models. The results show that households that had some employment received about 9 kilograms less of subsidized fertilizers than households that did not participate in the labour market. Hence, the targeting generally tends to exclude those that are wage earners. Remittances and business enterprise do not seem to influence the amount of subsidized fertilizers received by the household, while access to social safety nets weakly influences the amount of subsidized fertilizers. The impact of access to subsidized fertilizer in the previous season on the amount of subsidized fertilizer
| Variables | Model 1 | Model 2 | |-----------|---------|---------| | | coeff. | z | coeff. | z | | Age of household head (years) | 0.227 | 1.69\* | 0.118 | 0.84 | | Male headed household (0/1) | 1.698 | 0.49 | 0.921 | 0.26 | | Elderly headed household (0/1) | -7.940 | -1.49 | -4.926 | -0.85 | | Household size (adult equivalents) | -1.172 | -1.62 | 0.165 | 0.16 | | Value of assets in US dollars in 2008/9 | -0.004 | -1.09 | -0.004 | -1.29 | | Cultivated land in hectares in 2008/9 | 12.947 | 4.75\* | 13.679 | 5.15\* | | Tobacco cultivation in 2008/9 (0/1) | 27.639 | 7.21\* | – | – | | Maize marketing in 2008/9 (0/1) | 15.934 | 3.22\* | – | – | | Crop marketing in 2008/9 (0/1) | – | – | 17.277 | 5.45\* | | Quantity of commercial fertilizers bought in 2007/8 (KG) | -0.014 | -1.28 | -0.010 | -1.00 | | Own poverty assessment as poor in 2007/8 (0/1) | -15.299 | -2.62\* | -13.819 | -2.37\* | | Adequate food consumption in 2008/9 (0/1) | 6.501 | 2.23\* | 6.179 | 2.10\* | | Business enterprise in 2007/8 (0/1) | 0.432 | 0.15 | -0.389 | -0.13 | | Labour market participation in 2007/8 (0/1) | -8.217 | -2.85\* | -9.297 | -3.20\* | | Remittance receipts in 2007/8 (0/1) | 5.049 | 1.63 | 4.486 | 1.44 | | Access to social safety nets in 2007/8 (0/1) | 4.666 | 1.40 | 5.906 | 1.79\* | | Access to fertilizer coupons in 2007/8 (0/1) | 56.109 | 15.82\* | 57.306 | 16.19\* | | Open forum allocations 2008/9 and poor 2007/8 (0/1) | 13.167 | 3.36\* | 11.489 | 2.89\* | | Central region (0/1) | -24.973 | -6.35\* | -28.354 | -6.97\* | | Southern region (0/1) | -18.023 | -4.51\* | -20.761 | -5.20\* | | Constant | 3.257 | 0.35 | 4.675 | 0.50 | | Number of observations | 1982 | 1982 | | F (18, 1963) | 27 | 26.3 | | Prob > F | 0.000 | 0.000 | | Pseudo R-squared | 0.0406 | 0.0388 |
Notes: The dependent variable is quantity of subsidized fertilizer acquired in the 2008/09 agricultural season. Robust t-statistics with superscripts a, b and c denotes significance at the 1, 5 and 10 percent levels, respectively. in the 2008/09 season is statistically significant at the 1 percent level in both models. Households that are successively receiving subsidized fertilizers receive 56 kilograms (just more than a 50 kg bag) more that households that only received fertilizers in the 2008/09 season. Transparency in coupon allocation also tends to favour the poor with the coefficient of the interaction of open forum and poverty being positive and statistically significant at the 1 percent level. We also find that the central and southern regions also tend to receive about 28 kilograms and 20 kilograms per household less than the northern region.
5. Conclusions
The paper set out to investigate factors that facilitate access to subsidized fertilizer coupons in Malawi. Since 2005/06 season, the Malawi Government has been implementing an agricultural input subsidy programme targeting smallholder farmers in order to improve productivity and food security. As a productivity enhancing programme, the input subsidy programme also plays a social protection role among the poor and vulnerable household by making food accessible and available, and directly by targeting vulnerable groups. The agricultural input subsidy programme targets smallholder farmers who are resource-poor but own a piece of land. The targeting criteria also recognizes special vulnerable groups as targets such as guardians looking after physically challenged persons, child-headed, female-headed and orphan-headed households and households infected or affected with HIV and AIDS. There are contradictions in the targeting criteria in reaching out to vulnerable groups. Nonetheless, the targeting criteria remain wide and there are variations in the use of the targeting guidelines in different communities particularly since the number of needy households tends to be much larger than the available number of fertilizer coupons.
The main focus of the subsidy is on fertilizers for maize production and improved maize seed varieties, although over the years there has been inclusion of cash crops such as tobacco, tea, coffee and cotton. The fertilizer subsidy benefited 1.5 million maize farmers and 0.2 million tobacco farmers in the 2008/09 agricultural season; more than half of the estimated number of farming households. The fertilizer coupons were allocated based on an updated register of farmers, and for most households the identification of beneficiary households and subsequent allocation of coupons were done in an open meeting.
Since the target group for the fertilizer subsidy programme includes the poor and vulnerable groups, apart from productivity enhancement, the subsidy may also provide social protection to vulnerable groups. Several findings emerge from the study with implications on targeting of the input subsidy programme. First, the study finds that although the poor and vulnerable households are also allocated subsidized fertilizer coupons, they are less likely and receive less than the better off smallholder farmers that have larger parcels of land and wealthier. Elderly-headed households and the poor are less likely to access subsidized fertilizer coupons while households with larger parcels of land and those that market part of their produce are more likely to receive subsidized fertilizer coupons. The programme, however, succeeds in excluding households that earn incomes from the labour market, particularly those that earn income from non-ganyu labour. There is a weak relationship between access to coupons and quantity of fertilizers from commercial purchases, implying that the problems of targeting result in some displacement of commercial sales of fertilizers.
Secondly, participation in other social safety nets in the past does not exclude households from the input subsidy programme. The beneficiaries of other social safety nets are more likely to access subsidized fertilizer coupons, hence there are complementarities among social safety nets. Some of the social safety nets that target the poor and vulnerable households, such as cash-for-work or public works programmes, ease the cash constraint of vulnerable households and enable them to redeem the fertilizer coupons. In addition, if other social safety nets are well targeted at the vulnerable groups, it implies that participation in such programmes provide additional information on vulnerability in targeting the input subsidy programme. Finally, openness in the implementation of the input subsidy programme is pro-poor. The introduction of the open forums in the allocation of subsidized fertilizer coupons tends to raise the likelihood of the poor, who are generally marginalized, to access subsidized fertilizer coupons and to acquire more subsidized fertilizers than when the process is not transparent.
The results therefore suggest that for the subsidy programme to effectively perform its direct social protection role there is a need to review the targeting criteria so that they recognize the vulnerable groups as the main target group provided such households have cultivatable land. For instance, using a point system on the existing criteria has the potential to increase access to subsidized fertilizers to the vulnerable groups. While possession of land should be the basic condition for access to fertilizer coupons, households should gain additional targeting points if they also qualify as vulnerable households as defined by the existing criteria. For instance, an elderly female-headed household would get two additional targeting points while an elderly male-headed household would only get one additional targeting point. Households with land and high targeting points should be prioritized in the allocation of coupons using an open forum held in the community. Furthermore, there is also a need to enhance the complementarity of the input subsidy programme and cash-for-work programmes through increased coordination, particularly to enable vulnerable groups to access cash for the redemption of subsidized fertilizer coupons. End Notes
This paper is an output of the Future Agricultures Consortium (FAC) in the thematic area of Agricultural Growth and Social Protection. The usual disclaimer applies.
1 Professor of Economics, Wadonda Consult, PO Box 669, Zomba, Malawi. Email: echirwa@yahoo.com. 2 Program Analyst, UNDP Lilongwe, Malawi and Professor of Development Economics, Centre for Development, Environment and Policy (CeDEP), School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), University of London. 3 Dorward et al. (2009) discuss these in the context of post-independence agricultural policies in Malawi. 4 This section draws on Dorward and Chirwa (2009) and Dorward et al. (2010). 5 The inclusion of cash crops such as coffee and tea was more politically motivated; 2009 being an election year smallholder tea and coffee farmers lobbied during the year to benefit from the subsidy programme on grounds of the substantial increase in the cost of fertilizers (Dorward et al. 2010). 6 These errors are also known as E-mistakes (excessive coverage) and F-mistakes (failure to reach intended beneficiaries), respectively (Cornia and Stewart 1995). See Coady and Skoufias (2001) for alternative interpretations. 7 There are several factors that lead to farmers’ inability to redeem the vouchers including lack of money to redeem the coupons, unavailability of inputs, availability of inappropriate types of fertilizers and late distribution of vouchers particularly supplementary allocations (SOAS et al. 2008). However, only 1.2 percent of households in the sample were unable to redeem their fertilizer coupons. 8 The models are similar to those used in SOAS et al. (2008). However, the major departure in this paper is that we use mostly variables derived from the previous season (2007/07) to predict receipt of fertilizer vouchers in the current season (2008/09). 9 The self-assessment of poverty involves the households’ perception of their own poverty using a six step ladder ranging from 1 (very poor) to 6 (very rich). The poor are those with the ladder values from 1 to 3. 10 These social safety nets include free food distribution, food or cash for work programmes, targeted nutrition programmes, supplementary feeding programmes and direct cash transfers implemented by government and non-governmental organisations. 11 We also estimated the models with ganyu employment in 2007/08 instead of participation in the labour market in general. Although, the marginal effect remained negative, the coefficient was statistically insignificant. This suggests that the labour market participation and access to subsidy coupons is more driven by non-ganyu labour participation.
References
Chinsinga, B. (2009) ‘Participation of Civil Society in the Monitoring of the Agricultural Input Subsidy Programme (AISP)’, report presented to the Consortium of FUM, CISANET and MEJN. Lilongwe, Malawi: FUM, CISANET and MEJN.
Coady, D. and Skoufias, E. (2001) On the Targeting and Redistributive Efficiencies of Alternative Transfer Instruments. FCND Discussion Paper 100, Washington, D.C., USA: International Food Policy Research Institute.
Coady, D., Grosh, M. and Hoddinott, J. (2002) Targeting Outcomes Redux. FCND Discussion Paper 144, Washington, D.C., USA: International Food Policy Research Institute.
Cornia, G. A. and Stewart, F. (1995) ‘Food Subsidies: Two Errors of Targeting’, in Stewart, F. (ed), Adjustment and Poverty: Options and Choices, London and New York: Routledge.
Dorward, A. and Chirwa, E. (2009) ‘The Agricultural Input Subsidy Programme 2005 to 2008: Achievements and Challenges’, paper presented to the Government of Malawi and DFID, Lilongwe, Malawi: Malawi Government and DFID (Malawi).
Dorward, A., Chirwa, E. and Slater, R. (2010) ‘Evaluation of the 2008/09 Agricultural Input Subsidy Programme, Malawi: Report on Programme Implementation’, report presented to the Government of Malawi and DFID, Lilongwe, Malawi: Malawi Government and DFID (Malawi).
Dorward, A., Guenther, B. and Sabates-Wheeler, R. (2009) Agriculture and Social Protection in Malawi. FAC Working Paper No. SP02, Brighton, UK: Future Agricultures Consortium.
Dorward, A., Sabates-Wheeler, R., MacAuslan, I., Buckley, C. P., Kydd, J. and Chirwa, E. (2006) Promoting Agriculture for Social Protection or Social Protection for Agriculture: Strategic Policy and Research Issues. FAC Discussion Paper, Brighton, UK: Future Agricultures Consortium.
GOM (2008a) ‘The 2007/2008 Inputs Subsidy Programme Review Report’, Lilongwe, Malawi: Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security, Government of Malawi.
GOM (2008b) ‘The 2008/2009 Farm Inputs Subsidy Programme: Implementation Guidelines’, Lilongwe, Malawi: Ministry of Agriculture and Food Security, Government of Malawi.
GOM and World Bank (2007) Malawi – Poverty and Vulnerability Assessment: Investing in Our Future, Washington, D.C., USA: The World Bank and Government of Malawi.
ICL (Imperial College of London), Wadonda Consult, Michigan State University and Overseas Development Institute (2007) ‘Evaluation of the 2006/7 Agricultural Input Supply Programme, Malawi’, report presented to the Government of Malawi and DFID, Lilongwe, Malawi: Malawi Government and DFID (Malawi).
Morley, S. and Coady, D. (2003) From Social Assistance to Social Development: Targeted Education Subsidies in Developing Countries. Washington, D.C., USA: Center for Global Development and International Food Policy Research Institute.
SOAS (School of Oriental and African Studies), Wadonda Consult, Michigan State University and Overseas Development Institute (2008) ‘Evaluation of the 2006/7 Agricultural Input Supply Programme, Malawi’, report presented to the Government of Malawi and DFID, Lilongwe, Malawi: Malawi Government and DFID (Malawi). Acknowledgements
We acknowledge the inspiration and guidance given by Ian Scoones and John Thompson who are the coordinators of the Science, Technology and Innovation (STI) theme under which this was pilot study conducted. We also acknowledge the FAC Growth and Social Protection theme coordinator Stephen Devereux who reviewed this paper. We are grateful to Ollie Burch for administrative support and Liz Adams and Rob Tripp for their useful comments and suggestions on the draft paper.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2596-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 14,
"total-input-tokens": 39196,
"total-output-tokens": 15133,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
150,
1
],
[
150,
6144,
2
],
[
6144,
11208,
3
],
[
11208,
16626,
4
],
[
16626,
22494,
5
],
[
22494,
29070,
6
],
[
29070,
33561,
7
],
[
33561,
38215,
8
],
[
38215,
44753,
9
],
[
44753,
49067,
10
],
[
49067,
55100,
11
],
[
55100,
60858,
12
],
[
60858,
61347,
13
],
[
61347,
61347,
14
]
]
} |
c5ced55ea34b6485c5d8318264de4fc3864b7cc8 | Fake alcohol
How to identify fake or illegally produced alcohol and guidance on the dangers of consuming these products.
Fake or illegally produced alcohol is alcohol that is made in unlicensed distilleries or people's homes to be sold.
Fake alcohol may be packaged to look like well-known, legally produced brands. This is known as counterfeiting.
Vodka is the most commonly faked spirit. We advise that if you see vodka on sale at a really cheap price, it probably isn't vodka.
Properly produced and certified alcoholic drinks are made with ethanol which is a type of alcohol that's approved for human consumption. Fake alcoholic drinks can be produced using other, cheaper types of alcohol. Drinking them can leave you blind, in a coma or even worse.
Fake alcohol can contain chemicals used in:
- antifreeze
- screen wash
- nail polish remover
How to spot and avoid fake alcohol
Always remember the ‘4Ps’:
- product – watch out for fake versions as well as brand names you have never heard of
- price – if the price looks too good to be true, it probably is
- packaging – look out for poor quality labelling, spelling mistakes and bottles that have been tampered with
- place – always buy your alcohol from a reputable off-licence or retailer
If you suspect someone is supplying or selling fake alcohol then you should report this through your local Trading Standards office. They will escalate your report to the National Food Crime Unit (NFCU) or HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) where necessary.
You should seek medical advice if you think you’ve drunk fake alcohol.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2597-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1600,
"total-output-tokens": 381,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1581,
1
]
]
} |
d61c43741ac08ec0a9b7b325aec0b0ff47e6c3bc | Contents
Contents 1 Introduction 2 Key Findings 4 Section 1 - The Family Justice System 5 Section 2 - Public Law 7 Section 3 - Private Law 11 Section 4 - Legal representation 13 Section 5 - Matrimonial matters 16 Section 6 - Domestic violence remedy orders 19 Section 7 - Forced Marriage Protection Orders 20 Section 8 - Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders 21 Section 9 - Adoptions 22 Section 10 - The Mental Capacity Act 23 Section 11 - The Probate Service 27 Contacts 29 Introduction
This statistical bulletin presents statistics on activity in the family courts of England and Wales and provides provisional figures for the latest quarter (January to March 2016) with accompanying commentary and analysis. The figures give a summary overview of the volume of cases dealt with by these courts over time, with statistics also broken down for the main types of case involved. Detailed statistics and historic time series can be found in the accompanying Excel tables.
The statistics in this bulletin are used to monitor court workloads, to assist in the development of policy, and their subsequent monitoring and evaluation.
Information on civil cases can be found here:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/civil-justice-statistics
Information on criminal cases can be found here:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/criminal-justice-statistics
Information on publicly funding legal services is now published by the Legal Aid Agency and can be found here:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics
There is also a separate Guide to Family Court Statistics published alongside this publication which provides definitions for the terms used in this report, information regarding the symbols and conventions used in the bulletin, as well as information about the systems and data sources used to compile the statistics.
Family Court Statistics Visualisation Tool
As part of our wider work on improving data visualisation and accessibility, we have developed a data visualisation tool which sits on top of the data underlying the publication and its associated csv files – the tool provides users with the capability to:
- interrogate the published information at a lower level of detail; and
- produce bespoke charts specific to their user requirements.
The tool can be found here:
https://public.tableau.com/profile/moj.analysis#!/vizhome/FamilyCourtStatisticsTool/Frontpage
We are seeking views on how effectively the data visualisation tool:
- better meets user needs; and
- improves the dissemination of information. As well as requesting feedback on the data visualisation tool, the structure and content of this report are continually being reviewed to reflect user requirements. If you have any feedback about the report generally, please contact the production team using the contact details at the back of this report.
Previous editions of Family Court Statistics Quarterly can be found at:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/family-court-statistics-quarterly
Earlier editions of the information presented in this bulletin prior to July 2014 are in the Family chapters of the Court Statistics Quarterly publications which can be found at:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/court-statistics-quarterly
There are a number of CSV files that support this publication, in the accompanying zip file. Further information about these files can be found in the word document ‘Guide to Family Justice - Guide to national and court-level information.doc’, which is also included in the zip file. The CSV files contain:
- Selected summary of family cases by Designated Family Judge area and region.
- Additional breakdowns and further details for each of the ‘main tables’ published alongside this document.
The next edition of Family Court Statistics Quarterly is scheduled to be published on 29 September 2016, covering the period April to June 2016.
**Users of the statistics**
The main users of these statistics are Ministers and officials in central government responsible for developing policy with regard to family justice. Other users include the central government departments, and various voluntary organisations with an interest in family justice. The data also feed into statistics produced by the Office for National Statistics, such as public sector productivity. Key Findings
This report presents statistics on activity in the family courts of England and Wales in the first quarter of 2016 (January to March).
- 63,015 cases started in family courts in England and Wales in January to March 2016 maintaining the steady flat trend seen in recent years. Nearly half of new cases are divorce cases.
- Public law applications increased by 18% to 4,504 in January to March 2016, compared with the previous year (3,826) – the number of children involved in public law applications also increased by 14% over the same period to 8,287.
- The average time for the disposal of divorce cases with financial remedy has been steadily increasing from the start of 2015 to 24.8 weeks in January to March 2016, following a long period of stability around 20 weeks.
- The average time for the disposal of a care or supervision application made in January to March 2016 was 28 weeks, remaining steady over the past year after the longer term downward trend seen since 2011.
- 60% of care or supervision proceedings were disposed of within 26 weeks, following on from the 26 week time limit for completing these cases introduced in the Children and Families Act 2014.
- After a rise in the number of applications for non-molestation domestic violence remedy orders during 2013, the trend has remained steady over the last two years.
- Following their introduction in July 2015, there have been 60 applications and 46 orders made for Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders (FGMPOs) up to the end of March 2016.
- There were 1,545 applications made for an adoption order, down 11% from the same quarter in 2015.
- There has been a gradual upward trend in the total number of applications and orders made under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and a 9% increase in applications in the latest quarter from January to March 2015.
- Applications relating to Deprivation of Liberty tripled over the last 12 months from 236 made in January to March 2015 to 678 in the latest quarter.
- There were 141,667 Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPAs) in January to March 2016, the highest quarterly figure so far and up 18% on the same quarter for 2015. Section 1 - The Family Justice System
Until 22 April 2014, family cases were dealt with at Family Proceedings Courts (which were part of the magistrates’ courts), at county courts or in the Family Division of the High Court. From 22 April 2014, all family cases are now dealt with in the Single Family Court.
Family courts deal with cases such as: parental disputes, local authority intervention to protect children, matrimonial cases such as divorce petitions, the financial provisions for children after divorce or relationship breakdown, domestic violence remedies and adoption.
Total family court case caseload
In January to March 2016, 63,015 new cases started in family courts and 57,791 cases were concluded. Table 1 (in the accompanying Excel tables) shows the total number of new cases starting and cases reaching a conclusion in family courts in each quarter from 2011. Figure 1 below shows the trend in cases started over time by case type from January to March 2011 to January to March 2016. Matrimonial cases (divorce) consist of nearly half of all new cases starting in the family courts.
Figure 1: New family cases started, by case type, January to March 2011 to January to March 2016 Timeliness by Case Type
Figure 2 shows the average number of weeks to first disposal across the different case types in the family courts. In 2011, the duration of public law cases was almost twice as long as other case types (50 weeks). However, from 2012 the number of weeks to reach a first disposal fell steadily and halved to 27.4 weeks by Q2 2014 (April to June). It has since remained fairly stable, although there has been a further drop of 1.3 weeks over the last year to 26.2 weeks in January to March 2016 (Table 6).
Timeliness for private law, domestic violence, divorce (no financial remedy) and adoption have remained fairly stable over recent quarters. The time taken to first disposal in divorce cases with financial remedy has been steadily increasing from the start of 2015 to 24.8 weeks in January to March 2016, following a long period of stability around 20 weeks - this may be due to the clearance of a backlog of cases following the creation of the new centralised divorce centre for London and the South East region during 2015. Note that adoption timeliness in Q3 2014 was higher because of a data cleansing exercise in some regions which administratively closed old cases.
Detailed figures are available in Table 6 and timeliness by legal representation figures are provided in Section 4.
Figure 2: Timeliness for proceedings in the Family Court by case type, January to March 2011 to January to March 2016 Section 2 - Public Law
Public law cases are those brought by local authorities or, very rarely, an authorised person to protect the child and ensure they get the care they need. They can apply for a range of different orders. Types of order include a care or supervision order which determines whether the child should be looked after or supervised by the local authority, or an emergency protection order which allows an individual or local authority to take a child away from a place where they are in immediate danger to a place of safety.
Following the publicity surrounding the Baby P case, the number of children involved in public law applications made by local authorities jumped in 2009 from around 20,000 to almost 26,000 per year and subsequently increased to nearly 30,000 per year. Figures have remained fairly steady at around 7,000 per quarter, but there has been an increase in the most recent quarters, with 8,287 children involved in public law applications in January to March 2016, an increase of 14% from the equivalent quarter in 2015 (Figure 3).
The number of applications made, which can cover more than one child, was 4,807 in January to March 2016 – on average, there were 1.7 children involved in each application. More than one application may be made during the life of a case. The numbers of cases started in January to March 2016 was 4,504, up 18% on the same quarter in 2015 (Table 2).
Figure 3: Public law applications: number of children involved, number of application events and number of cases started, January to March 2011 to January to March 2016 There were 10,045 children involved in public law orders made in January to March 2016. The number of orders made is generally higher than the number of applications made, as some orders relate to applications made in an earlier time period, and an application for one type can result in an order or orders of a different type being made.
Figure 4 shows that the most common types of order applied for in January to March 2016 were for care (74% of children involved in applications). There is often a different pattern between the types of order applications and the orders that are given because an application for one type can result in an order of a different type being made. For example, there were 448 children involved in applications for a supervision order in January to March 2016, compared to 1,791 children involved in supervision orders made in that same quarter (Table 3). The trend in disposals tends to lag behind that for applications, due to the time taken for a decision to be reached in cases.
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) also publishes data on the number of care applications, the latest edition of which can be found here:
www.cafcass.gov.uk/leaflets-resources/organisational-material/care-and-private-law-demand-statistics/care-demand-statistics.aspx
Case level care order figures are currently not produced by the MoJ and so comparisons between the two datasets cannot be made at this time.
Figure 4: Public law applications and orders made, showing proportion of children involved in each order type, January to March 2016
EPO = Emergency protection order, SG = Special guardianship order, Parental resp = Parental responsibility order Timeliness of care proceedings Statistics on the time taken to complete care and supervision cases in the family courts of England and Wales are given in Table 5. This table presents summary statistics showing the time, in weeks, between the date an application for a care or supervision order was lodged and the date the first care, supervision, or other substantive order was made in the case, for those cases disposed of during each quarter.
A long term downward trend seen since 2011 reduced the average time for a disposal to be made to around 29 weeks in Q3 2014 (July to September), and then dropped again slightly to 27.5 weeks at the end of 2015 (Table 5). This figure has remained constant in the latest quarter (Figure 5).
Figure 5: Timeliness for care and supervision proceedings in the Family Court, January to March 2011 to January to March 2016
The average time for a disposal can be skewed by cases that take a long time, and so the median time is also calculated. The median time to make a disposal in a case was 25 weeks for all children involved in care and supervision proceedings where a decision was reached during January to March 2016. This indicates that half of the children waited 25 weeks or less from application to a substantive disposal, and the other half waited at least 25 weeks. This median value is different to the average (mean) quoted in the paragraph above as it is not influenced by the few very long case durations.
Figure 6 shows how many children were involved in each timeliness band in their case proceedings for cases disposed in January to March 2016. Figure 6: Timeliness for care and supervision proceedings showing number of children involved in each timeliness band, January to March 2016 Section 3 - Private Law
Private law cases are those court cases between two or more private individuals who are trying to resolve a dispute. This is generally where parents have split up and there is a disagreement about who the children should live with and have contact or otherwise spend time with.
The number of Private law cases started in January to March 2016 was 11,527, up 9% from the equivalent quarter in 2015 (Table 2).
There was an 11% increase in cases disposed of in January to March 2016 compared to the equivalent quarter in 2015.
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) also publishes (England only) data on the number of private law cases started, the latest edition of which can be found here:
www.cafcass.gov.uk/leaflets-resources/organisational-material/care-and-private-law-demand-statistics/private-law-demand-statistics.aspx
Figure 7 compares both Cafcass and MoJ figures and shows that the two trends are very similar: for the last two years the difference between the two sets of figures shows MoJ, on average, 9% higher. This is mostly due to Cafcass only receiving Section 8 cases (contact, residence, prohibited steps and specific issue) from the courts.
Figure 7: Comparison of the number of Private law cases received, as recorded by Cafcass and the MoJ (England only), January to March 2011 to January to March 2016 Other differences between the two data sets include the following:
- Section 8 cases where all of the issues are dealt with on the day (called 'urgent without notice' applications) should not be sent to Cafcass.
- Section 8 cases which are not listed within the Private Law Programme (PLP) and do not have a first hearing dispute resolution appointment (FHDRA) should also not be sent to Cafcass.
- Certain non-section 8 cases can be sent to Cafcass if the subject child is a party to ongoing proceedings (and a Cafcass officer has been appointed as the children’s guardian) or the court is directed to do so by a judge or legal advisor.
This accounts for the discrepancy between the two data sets which cannot be accurately matched as it is impossible to identify the various situations described above from administrative data sources (particularly the 'urgent without notice' applications).
**Timeliness of private law cases**
As shown in Figure 2 and Table 6, from the middle of 2012 to the end of March 2014 the average time to first definitive disposal had been on a slight upward trend for private law cases overall. This trend then reversed with the average time to first disposal at 14.5 weeks for 2015 overall, down 2.4 weeks from the 2014 overall average. For the most recent quarter, January to March 2016, the average time to first disposal is 14.8 weeks, with very little change from the equivalent quarter in 2015. Section 4 - Legal representation
Figures on the legal representation of parties in family-related court cases are shown in Table 6. This gives the number of disposals made during each quarter and the average duration between application and first substantive disposal, for divorce, public law, private law, adoption and domestic violence cases, according to whether the applicant(s), respondent(s), both or neither had legal representation during the case. A further breakdown of Table 6 by region is published in the CSV files that accompany this publication.
The legal representation status reflects whether the applicant/respondent’s legal representative has been recorded or left blank within FamilyMan, the family court case management system. Therefore, parties recorded as without legal representation are not necessarily self-representing litigants in person - for example, Table 6 suggests that for half of the divorce cases not involving financial remedies disposed, neither party had legal representation. However, further analysis shows that these were uncontested cases and almost all of them did not have a single hearing.
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offender Act, 2012
The implementation of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) in April 2013 made changes to the scope and eligibility of legal aid. From April 2013, legal aid is now only available for private family law cases (such as contact or divorce) if there is evidence of domestic violence or child abuse and child abduction cases. Legal aid remains available for public family law cases (such as adoption).
The full details of the LASPO Act can be found here: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/10/enacted
The removal of legal aid for many private law cases has resulted in a change in the pattern of legal representation, and Figure 8 shows how this has changed over the time. Around the time that the LASPO reforms were implemented there was a marked increase in the number and proportion of cases where neither party are represented, with an equivalent drop in the proportion of those cases where both parties were represented. In January to March 2016, neither the applicant nor respondent had legal representation in one-third of private law cases, an increase of 20 percentage points from January to March 2013. Correspondingly, the proportion of cases where both parties had legal representation dropped by 20 percentage points over the same time period. In the most recent quarters, there has been some volatility in the proportion of cases that have representation for the ‘applicant only’ and ‘both applicant and respondent’ representation – both appear now to be in line with the overall general trend. The Legal Aid Agency (LAA - formerly the Legal Services Commission) collects statistics on those applying for legal aid, and figures on the number of applications received and certificates granted by various Family categories have been published in their annual and quarterly statistical reports, which can be found here:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics
**Timeliness of cases by legal representation**
In general, across all case types, cases where either both parties or the respondent only had legal representation took longer than those cases where only the applicant was represented or where both parties were without legal representation. Figure 9 shows the average duration by case type in January to March 2016.
For private law cases, the average time to first disposal was generally falling until it started to increase during 2013. This rise was driven by increases for all representation groups, but particularly in the timeliness of cases where both parties were represented (Figure 10). Despite a decrease during 2015 in the average time to first disposal for private law cases overall, timeliness in January to March 2016 is similar to the equivalent quarter in 2015. This is true across all types of representation except for ‘respondent only’ which accounts for 10% of cases and is a volatile time series. Therefore, quarter on quarter changes should be treated with caution. Figure 9: Timeliness of cases according to legal representation of participants, by case type, January to March 2016
Figure 10: Average time to first disposal in private law cases, January to March 2011 to January to March 2016 Section 5 - Matrimonial matters
Table 7 provides the numbers of petitions and decrees granted for divorce, annulment and judicial separation in England and Wales. The National CSV file and the data visualisation tool that accompanies this publication provide additional information on matrimonial proceedings such as gender of petitioner and whether children were involved or not.
Eleven centralised divorce centres were introduced throughout 2014 and 2015 in England and Wales, with the vast majority of uncontested decree nisi applications being considered by Legal Advisers (rather than district judges) at those centres. This should be noted when looking at the relevant figures given in the DFJ and Region level CSV file.
Over 99% of petitions filed for matrimonial proceedings are for divorce. There are very small numbers for annulments and judicial separations. There were 29,195 petitions in January to March 2016 and 26,814 divorces, both of which are similar to the same quarter for 2015 (Table 7). There were also 32,338 Decree Nisi granted, an increase of 17% from January to March 2015. The large volume for the latest quarter is due to the clearance of the backlog following the creation of the new centralised divorce centre for London and the South East Region during 2015.
In addition to caseload, there are also divorce case progression figures presented in this publication. A summary of divorce case progression can be found in Table 8 – it shows the number of divorce cases commencing in each year since 2003 and in each quarter since 2009, together with the proportion of those cases that had reached certain stages by the beginning of May 2016 (when the data was extracted for producing this bulletin). Following consultation, two alternatives for measuring and presenting timeliness are now produced. The first looks at how long it has taken (in weeks) to get to certain stages in the relevant court process from the date when the petition was made (Table 7). The second reports how long it takes, on average, for petitions to reach each stage in the process, counted by the number of quarters elapsed (Table 9 and Figure 11).
These methods of presentation provide a better indication of case progression as they address the weaknesses identified with the previous methodology e.g. they now take account of the correlations between the percentages of claims reaching the milestones in different quarters. They also incorporate previous quarters’ data, which will reflect any recent economic or policy changes.
Over one-third (34%) of divorce petitions made after January 2011 reached Decree Nisi within 3 months after petition and a further third reached this stage within 3 to 6 months. Over half of the petitions reached Decree Absolute within nine months of petition (34% within 3 to 6 months and 18% within 6 to 9 months). Financial remedy
During a divorce, a marriage annulment, or a judicial separation, or the dissolution of a civil partnership, there may still be a need for the court to settle disputes over money or property. The court can make a financial remedy order, formerly known as ‘ancillary relief’. These orders include dealing with the arrangements for the sale or transfer of property, maintenance payments, a lump sum payment or the sharing of a pension. Orders for financial provision other than for financial remedy are not dependent upon divorce proceedings and may be made for children.
There were 11,067 applications in January to March 2016, a slight increase from a year earlier (Table 10).
In January to March 2016, there were 9,723 financial remedy disposals, unchanged from the equivalent quarter in 2015. During this latest period, 67% of disposals were uncontested, 23% were initially contested, and 9% were contested throughout.
As shown in Figure 12, in January to March 2016, property adjustment orders and lump sum orders accounted for more than half (59%) of the total financial remedy disposal types (Table 11).
Figure 12: Financial remedy disposal types, January to March 2016 Section 6 - Domestic violence remedy orders
A range of people can apply to the court for a domestic violence remedy order: spouses, cohabitants, ex-cohabitants, those who live or have lived in the same household (other than by reason of one of them being the other’s employee, tenant, lodger or boarder), certain relatives (for example, parents, grandparents, in-laws, brothers, sisters), and those who have agreed to marry one another.
Two types of order can be granted:
- a non-molestation order, which can either prohibit particular behaviour or general molestation by someone who has previously been violent towards the applicant and/or any relevant children,
- an occupation order, which can define or regulate rights of occupation of the home by the parties involved.
Figure 13: Applications for domestic violence remedy orders, January to March 2008 to January to March 2016
As shown in Figure 13, since 2011 the number of occupation applications remained fairly steady, whilst for non-molestation applications there was a general increasing trend to the end of 2013. Over the last year, the number of non-molestation applications has remained around 4,600. (Table 12) Section 7 - Forced Marriage Protection Orders
The Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007 came into force on 25 November 2008. The Act amended Part IV of the Family Law Act to enable 15 designated courts to make Forced Marriage Protection Orders (FMPOs) to prevent forced marriages from occurring and to offer protection to victims who might have already been forced into a marriage.
The number of applications and orders made for FMPOs is very small. Consequently, as Figure 14 shows, numbers fluctuate each quarter but overall there has been an increasing trend since their introduction in 2008. In January to March 2016, there were 51 applications and 49 orders made (Table 13). The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 came into force on 16 June 2014 and made it an offence to force a person to marry against their will, or to breach a FMPO, such that courts can no longer attach a power of arrest to an FMPO.
Figure 14: Applications and disposals of Forced Marriage Protection Orders, November 2008 to January to March 2016 Section 8 – Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders
Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders (FGMPOs) are intended to safeguard girls who are at risk of FGM at home or abroad, or who are survivors. They came into effect on 17 July 2015, and quarterly figures for these orders are presented in this bulletin for the third time (Table 14).
In January to March 2016, there were 13 applications and 14 orders made for FGMPOs. In total, there have been 60 applications and 46 orders made since their introduction up to the end of March 2016. Section 9 - Adoptions
An adoption order made by a court extinguishes the rights, duties and obligations of the natural parents or guardian and vests them in the adopters. On adoption, the child becomes for virtually all purposes in law the child of its adoptive parents and has the same rights of inheritance of property as any children born to the adoptive parents. Most adoptions in the UK are ‘standard’ adoptions. Data is also provided on other adoptions, which include foreign adoptions, convention adoptions and standard adoptions that include a foreign element. An adoption order is preceded by a placement order which allows a local authority to place a child with prospective adopters, unless parental consent has been given for the placement.
There was a long-term rise in adoption applications and orders from 2011 until mid-2014, with applications and orders 40% higher for 2014 overall compared to 2011 (Tables 15-16). Numbers have since declined, although this decrease has slowed in recent quarters. During January to March 2016, there were 1,545 applications made for an adoption order and 1,559 adoption orders were issued.
Two-thirds of adoption orders (67%) were issued to male/female couples, 16% to sole applicants, 10% to same-sex couples and a further 7% to step-parents (Figure 15). Figures on the sex and age band of adopted children can be found in Table 16 and timeliness figures can be found in Table 6. A wider range of breakdowns for adoption applications and orders, by for example type of order, can be produced from the accompanying data visualisation tool or CSV file.
Figure 15: Adoption orders issued, by adopter, January to March 2011 to January to March 2016 Section 10 – The Mental Capacity Act
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 provides a statutory framework to empower and protect vulnerable people who are not able to make their own decisions. The Act makes it clear who can take decisions, in which situations, and how they should go about this. It enables people to plan ahead for a time when they may lose capacity.
When the Mental Capacity Act 2005 came into force on 1 October 2007, the role and function of the Court of Protection (CoP) changed, and in addition, the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) was established. The OPG, an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice, supports the Public Guardian in registering Enduring Powers of Attorney (EPA), Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPA) and supervising Court of Protection appointed Deputies.
For more information on the roles of these specialised courts please see A Guide to Family Court Statistics that is published alongside this publication.
Court of Protection
In January to March 2016, there were 7,225 applications made under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, up 9% on the equivalent quarter in 2015. The majority of these (54%) related to applications for appointment of a property and affairs deputy (Table 17).
Following the introduction of new forms in July 2015, applicants must make separate applications for ‘property and affairs’ and ‘personal welfare’. This is why there were fewer ‘hybrid deputy’ applications compared to previous years.
There were 6,554 orders made, similar to the same quarter in 2015. Most (52%) of the orders related to the appointment of a deputy for property and affairs (Table 18). The trend in orders made mirrors that of applications and has been steadily increasing since 2010 albeit at a faster rate, as Figure 16 illustrates.
______________________________________________________________________
1 An LPA is a legal document that someone (the Donor) makes using a special form. It allows that person to choose someone in the present time, called the “Attorney”, that they trust to make decisions on their behalf, at a time in the future when they either lack the mental capacity or no longer wish to make those decisions themselves. Applications relating to deprivation of liberty increased from 109 in 2013 to 525 in 2014 to 1,497 in 2015. There were 678 applications made in the most recent quarter, triple the number made in January to March 2015. The overall increase follows the Supreme Court decision on 19 March 2014(^2) whereby it was considered a person could be deprived of their liberty in their own home, sheltered accommodation etc., and not just the nursing homes and hospitals which were previously covered. Of the 678 applications made in January to March 2016, 459 (68%) came from a Local Authority, 185 (27%) from solicitors and 34 (5%) from others including clinical commission groups, other professionals or applicants in person. Over half (52%) of the applications were made under the streamlined process set out in *Re X and others [2014]* EWCOP25.
The Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC) collects data from councils with social services responsibilities on deprivation of liberty at a case level on an annual(^3) and quarterly(^4) basis. Section 16 of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and *Re X* cases are new and considered by the court but not by Local Authorities first. Those cases which come under section 21A of the MCA 2005 are seen as appeals to the court of those who have already been assessed for deprivation of liberty and are likely to have been included in HSCIC figures.
______________________________________________________________________
(^2) *P v Cheshire West and Chester Council and P and Q v Surrey County Council [2014]* UKSC 19
(^3) [www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB14825](http://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB14825) Mandatory collection
(^4) [www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB17509](http://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB17509) Voluntary collection of number of DoLs applications, the number granted and the number not granted Office of the Public Guardian
There were 141,667 Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPAs) received in January to March 2016, the highest quarterly figure so far and up 18% on the same quarter for 2015 as shown in Figure 17 and Table 19. The recent increases are largely due to increased publicity and new online forms which have been introduced to make it simpler and faster to apply for LPAs. There were 3,511 EPAs in January to March 2016, down 14% on January to March 2015. There were 3,127 Deputyships(^5) appointed in January to March 2016, a decrease of 21% on the equivalent quarter in 2015.
Figure 17: Powers of attorney received, January to March 2008 to January to March 2016
Of LPAs registered in January to March 2016, 38% were for males – see Table 20. The most common age group applying for an LPA is 81-90 years, as shown in Figure 18 below.
(^5) Deputyships - A Deputy is legally responsible for acting and making decisions on behalf of a person who lacks capacity to make decisions for themselves. The Deputy order sets out specific powers in relation to the person who lacks capacity. Figure 18: Age of LPA donors registered as at end of March 2016 Section 11 – The Probate Service
When a person dies somebody has to deal with their estate (money, property and possessions left) by collecting in all the money, paying any debts and distributing what is left to those people entitled to it. Probate is the court’s authority; given to a person or persons to administer a deceased person’s estate and the document issued by the Probate Service is called a Grant of Representation. This document is usually required by the asset holders as proof to show the correct person or persons have the Probate Service’s authority to administer a deceased person’s estate.
In January to March 2016, 62,574 grants of representation were issued (Table 21). Grants of representation are known as either:
- Probate (when the deceased person left a valid will and an executor is acting). These made up 79% of grants in January to March 2016.
- Letters of administration with will (when a person has left a valid will but no executor is acting). These made up 6% of grants in January to March 2016.
- Letters of administration (usually when there is no valid will). These made up 15% of grants in January to March 2016.
These different types of grants of representation appoint people known as personal representatives to administer the deceased person’s estate.
Over a quarter of a million grants of representation were issued in 2015, up 11% on 2014 and the highest since 2007 (Table 22). As Figure 19 shows, this was driven by a rise in the number of probate grants, which account for more than three-quarters of grants made.
In January to March 2016, 62% of applications were made by solicitors and 38% were personal applications.
______________________________________________________________________
6 [www.justice.gov.uk/courts/probate/gor](http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/probate/gor) Current structure of the Probate Service
The Probate Service is currently made up of:
- The Principal Registry in London
- 11 District Probate Registries
- 18 Probate Sub-Registries situated throughout England and Wales
In January to March 2016, 6% of grants were issued by the Principal Registry and 94% by District Registries and Sub-Registries.
When a probate case is contested, The Chancery Division of the High Court deals with the matter. See the Guide to Court and Administrative Justice Statistics for more information on The Chancery Division. In 2015, there were 164 contested probate cases. Contacts
Press enquiries on the contents of this bulletin should be directed to the MoJ or HMCTS press offices:
**Sebastian Walters** Tel: 020 3334 3529 Email: sebastian.walters@justice.gsi.gov.uk
**Camilla Marshall** Tel: 0203 334 3531 Email: camilla.marshall@justice.gsi.gov.uk
Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the MoJ:
**Bridgette Miles**
Ministry of Justice 102 Petty France London SW1H 9AJ Tel: 020 3334 4571 Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
General enquiries about the statistics work of the MoJ can be emailed to statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
General information about the official statistics system of the UK is available from statisticsauthority.gov.uk/about-the-authority/uk-statistical-system
© Crown copyright Produced by the Ministry of Justice
Alternative formats are available on request from statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2598-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 30,
"total-input-tokens": 56862,
"total-output-tokens": 10070,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
0,
1
],
[
0,
482,
2
],
[
482,
2552,
3
],
[
2552,
4313,
4
],
[
4313,
6479,
5
],
[
6479,
7684,
6
],
[
7684,
9121,
7
],
[
9121,
10712,
8
],
[
10712,
12421,
9
],
[
12421,
14025,
10
],
[
14025,
14166,
11
],
[
14166,
15551,
12
],
[
15551,
16987,
13
],
[
16987,
19720,
14
],
[
19720,
21138,
15
],
[
21138,
21367,
16
],
[
21367,
23098,
17
],
[
23098,
24225,
18
],
[
24225,
25422,
19
],
[
25422,
26603,
20
],
[
26603,
27653,
21
],
[
27653,
28199,
22
],
[
28199,
29900,
23
],
[
29900,
32017,
24
],
[
32017,
33819,
25
],
[
33819,
34923,
26
],
[
34923,
34987,
27
],
[
34987,
36755,
28
],
[
36755,
37361,
29
],
[
37361,
38325,
30
]
]
} |
f3563c7c88a7b1a20f5b71af8a47d3ba6ccfaf61 | ## Contents
| Section | Page | |----------------------------------------------|------| | Contents | 1 | | Introduction | 2 | | Key Findings | 4 | | Section 1 - The Family Justice System | 6 | | Section 2 - Public Law | 7 | | Section 3 - Private Law | 11 | | Section 4 - Legal representation | 13 | | Section 5 - Matrimonial matters | 16 | | Section 6 - Domestic violence remedy orders | 19 | | Section 7 - Forced Marriage Protection Orders| 20 | | Section 8 - Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders | 21 | | Section 9 - Adoptions | 22 | | Section 10 - The Mental Capacity Act | 23 | | Section 11 - The Probate Service | 26 | | Contacts | 28 | Introduction
This statistical bulletin presents statistics relating to family courts, which were previously published within Court Statistics Quarterly.
It presents statistics on activity in the family courts of England and Wales and provides provisional figures for the latest quarter (July to September 2015) with accompanying commentary and analysis. The figures give a summary overview of the volume of cases dealt with by these courts over time, with statistics also broken down for the main types of case involved.
Figures on Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders (FGMPOs), which were introduced in July 2015, are published in this bulletin for the first time.
The statistics in this bulletin are used to monitor court workloads, to assist in the development of policy, and their subsequent monitoring and evaluation.
Information on civil cases can be found here: www.gov.uk/government/collections/civil-justice-statistics
Information on criminal cases can be found here: www.gov.uk/government/collections/criminal-justice-statistics-quarterly
Information on publicly funding legal services is now published by the Legal Aid Agency and can be found here: www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics
There is also a separate Guide to Family Court Statistics published alongside this publication which provides definitions for the terms used in this report, information regarding the symbols and conventions used in the bulletin, as well as information about the systems and data sources used to compile the statistics.
The structure and content of this report are continually being reviewed to reflect user requirements. If you have any feedback about the report generally, please contact the production team using the contact details at the back of this report.
Divorce case timeliness
In May 2015, we proposed a change to the presentation and calculation of divorce case progression estimates included in this statistical bulletin and requested feedback from users on these proposals.
A summary of user feedback is published in the following location; www.gov.uk/government/statistics/changes-to-moj-statistics-case-progression All users that provided a response to the proposals agreed that the previous methodology, which purely used a statistical model, should be removed. These have now been incorporated, and more details can be found in Section 5.
Earlier editions of the information presented in this bulletin are in the Family chapters of the Court Statistics Quarterly publications which can be found at:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/court-statistics-quarterly
There are a number of CSV files that support this publication, in the accompanying zip file. Further information about these files can be found in the word document ‘Guide to Family Justice - Guide to national and court-level information.doc’, which is also included in the zip file. The CSV files contain:
- Selected summary of family cases by Designated Family Judge area and region.
- Additional breakdowns and further details for each of the ‘main tables’ published alongside this document.
The next edition of Family Court Statistics Quarterly is scheduled to be published on 31 March 2016, covering the period October to December 2015.
**Users of the statistics**
The main users of these statistics are Ministers and officials in central government responsible for developing policy with regard to family justice. Other users include the central government departments, and various voluntary organisations with an interest in family justice. The data also feed into statistics produced by the Office for National Statistics, such as public sector productivity. Key Findings
This report presents statistics on activity in the family courts of England and Wales in the third quarter of 2015 (July to September).
- The number of cases that started in family courts in England and Wales in July to September 2015 was 61,499, nearly the same as that for the equivalent quarter of 2014, maintaining a steadily flat trend. Nearly half of new cases are divorce cases.
- The average time for the disposal of a care or supervision application made in July to September 2015 was 28 weeks, and the trend over the past year has remained stable at this level following the longer term downward trend seen since 2011.
- 60% of care or supervision proceedings were disposed of within 26 weeks, following on from the 26 week time limit for completing these cases introduced in the Children and Families Act 2014.
- There has been a decrease in the timeliness for private law cases overall in the last year – trend seen post-LASPO reforms during 2013 and early 2014 now seems to be reversing with timeliness returning to pre-LASPO levels.
- There has been a general upward trend in the number of applications for non-molestation domestic violence remedy orders since the end of 2012, and following the drop seen at the end of 2014, there was a slight increase in the latest quarter.
- There were 28 applications and 18 orders made for Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders (FGMPOs) in July to September 2015, following their introduction on 17 July 2015.
- The recent drop in the number of adoption orders issued has continued, with a 17% drop seen in July to September 2015 compared to the equivalent quarter for 2014, driven by the number of adoption orders issued to male/female couples falling by a quarter.
- There has been a gradual upward trend in the total number of applications and orders made under the Mental Capacity Act 2005.
- Applications relating to deprivation of liberty increased from 109 in 2013 to 525 in 2014. There were 386 applications made in the latest quarter July to September, similar to the 388 for the previous quarter. The overall upward trend follows the Supreme Court decision on 19 March 2014(^1) whereby it was considered a person could be deprived of their liberty in their own home, sheltered accommodation etc, and
______________________________________________________________________
(^1) *P v Cheshire West and Chester Council and P and Q v Surrey County Council* [2014] UKSC 19 not just the nursing homes and hospitals which were previously covered.
- There were 127,748 Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPAs) in July to September 2015, similar to the high seen in the previous quarter and up nearly 40% on the same quarter for 2014. This is largely due to increased publicity and new online forms which have been introduced to make it simpler and faster to apply for LPAs. Section 1 - The Family Justice System
Until 22 April 2014, family cases were dealt with at Family Proceedings Courts (which were part of the magistrates’ courts), at county courts or in the Family Division of the High Court. From 22 April 2014, all family cases are now dealt with in the Single Family Court.
Family courts deal with cases such as: parental disputes, local authority intervention to protect children, matrimonial cases such as divorce petitions, the financial provisions for children after divorce or relationship breakdown, domestic violence remedies and adoption.
Total family court case caseload (Table 1)
In July to September 2015, 61,499 new cases started in family courts and 57,938 cases were concluded. Table 1 shows the total number of new cases starting and cases reaching a conclusion in family courts in each quarter from 2011. Figure 1 below shows the trend in cases started over time by case type from January to March 2011 to July to September 2015.
Figure 1: New family cases started, by case type, January to March 2011 to July to September 2015 Section 2 - Public Law
Public law cases are those brought by local authorities or, very rarely, an authorised person to protect the child and ensure they get the care they need. They can apply for a range of different orders. Types of order include a care or supervision order which determines whether the child should be looked after or supervised by the local authority, or an emergency protection order which allows an individual or local authority to take a child away from a place where they are in immediate danger to a place of safety.
Following the publicity surrounding the Baby P case, the number of children involved in public law applications made by local authorities jumped in 2009 from around 20,000 to almost 26,000 per year. This had subsequently increased to nearly 30,000 per year. Figures have remained fairly steady at around 7,000 per quarter, with 7,539 children involved in public law applications in July to September 2015 (Figure 2).
The number of applications made, which can cover more than one child, was 4,365 in July to September 2015 – on average, there were 1.7 children involved in each application. More than one application may be made during the life of a case. The numbers of cases started in July to September 2015 was 4,057 (Table 2).
Figure 2: Public law applications: number of children involved, number of application events and number of cases started, January to March 2011 to July to September 2015
There were 10,172 children involved in public law orders made in July to September 2015. The number of orders made is generally higher than the number of applications made, as some orders relate to applications made in an earlier time period, and an application for one type can result in an order or orders of a different type being made. Figure 3 shows that the most common types of order applied for in July to September 2015 were care (71% of children involved in applications), followed by discharge of a care order (7%). There is often a different pattern between the types of order applications and the orders that are given – this is because an application for one type can result in an order of a different type being made. For example, there were 382 children involved in applications for a supervision order in July to September 2015, compared to 1,960 children involved in supervision orders made in that same quarter. The trend in disposals tends to lag behind that for applications, due to the time taken for a decision to be reached in cases.
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) also publishes data on the number of care applications, the latest edition of which can be found here:
www.cafcass.gov.uk/news/2015/november/october-2015-care-demand-statistics.aspx
Case level care order figures are currently not produced by the MoJ and so comparisons between the two datasets cannot be made at this time.
**Figure 3: Public law applications and orders made, showing proportion of children involved in each order type, July to September 2015**
EPO = Emergency protection order, SG = Special guardianship order, Parental resp = Parental responsibility order Timeliness of care proceedings
Statistics on the time taken to complete care and supervision cases in the family courts of England and Wales are given in Table 5. This table presents summary statistics showing the time, in weeks, between the date an application for a care or supervision order was lodged and the date the first care, supervision, or other substantive order was made in the case, for those cases disposed of during each quarter.
The long term downward trend seen since 2011 in the average time for a disposal to be made stabilised around 29 weeks from July 2014 until the latest quarter (July to September 2015) where it has fallen slightly to 28 weeks. (Figure 4).
Figure 4: Timeliness for care and supervision proceedings in the Family Court, January to March 2011 to July to September 2015
The average time for a disposal can be skewed by cases that take a long time, and so the median time is also calculated. The median time to make a disposal in a case was 25 weeks in July to September 2015 for all children involved in care and supervision proceedings where a decision was reached during July to September 2015. This indicates that half of the children waited 25 weeks or less from application to a substantive disposal, and the other half waited at least 25 weeks. This median value is different to the average (mean) quoted in the paragraph above as it is not influenced by the few very long case durations.
Figure 5 shows how many children were involved in each timeliness band in their case proceedings for cases disposed in July to September 2015. Figure 5: Timeliness for care and supervision proceedings showing number of children involved in each timeliness band, July to September 2015 Section 3 - Private Law
The number of Private law cases started in July to September 2015 was 11,157, up 5% compared to the equivalent quarter in 2014.
In comparison, for cases disposed in July to September 2015 there was an apparent decrease of 50% compared to the equivalent quarter in 2014 (from 24,371 to 12,255). However, this is because there was a one-off increase in the number of private law cases in July to September 2014 due to an audit by HMCTS of all open private law cases.
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) also publishes (England only) data on the number of private law cases started, the latest edition of which can be found here:
www.cafcass.gov.uk/news/2015/november/october-2015-private-law-demand-statistics.aspx
These are compared against figures in this bulletin in Figure 6, which shows that the two trends are very similar.
Figure 6: Comparison of the number of Private law cases received, as recorded by Cafcass and the MoJ (England only), January to March 2011 to July to September 2015
For the last three years the difference between the two sets of figures is usually between 6% and 9%, and this is mostly due to Cafcass generally only receiving section 8 cases (contact, residence, prohibited steps and specific issue) from the courts. Other differences between the two data sets include the following: • Section 8 cases where all of the issues are dealt with on the day (called 'urgent without notice' applications) should not be sent to Cafcass.
• Section 8 cases which are not listed within the Private Law Programme (PLP) and do not have a first hearing dispute resolution appointment (FHDRA) should also not be sent to Cafcass.
• Certain non-section 8 cases can be sent to Cafcass if the subject child is a party to ongoing proceedings (and a Cafcass officer has been appointed as the children's guardian) or the court is directed to do so by a judge or legal advisor.
This means that the two sets of figures cannot be accurately matched as it is impossible to identify the various situations described above from administrative data sources (particularly the 'urgent without notice' applications).
**Timeliness of private law cases**
Table 6 shows that from the middle of 2012 to July to September 2014, for private law cases overall the average time to first definitive disposal had been on a slight upward trend. In the most recent quarters, this trend appears to be reversing with the average time to first disposal at 14.3 weeks for July to September 2015 (down 2.5 weeks from the equivalent quarter in 2014).
For more details on the timeliness in private law cases please see Section 4 below. Section 4 - Legal representation
Figures on the legal representation of parties in family-related court cases are shown in Table 6. This gives the number of disposals made during each quarter and the average duration between application and first substantive disposal, for divorce, public law, private law, adoption and domestic violence cases, according to whether the applicant(s), respondent(s), both or neither had legal representation during the case.
A further breakdown of Table 6 by region is published in the CSV files that accompanies this publication.
The legal representation status reflects whether the applicant/respondent's legal representative has been recorded or left blank within FamilyMan, the family court case management system. Therefore, parties recorded as without legal representation are not necessarily self-representing litigants in person - for example, Table 6 suggests that for half of the divorce cases not involving financial remedies disposed, neither party had legal representation. However, further analysis shows that these were uncontested cases and about 98 to 99% of them did not have a single hearing.
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offender Act, 2012
The implementation of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) in April 2013 made changes to the scope and eligibility of legal aid.
The Legal Aid Agency (LAA - formerly the Legal Services Commission) collects statistics on those applying for legal aid, and figures on the number applications received and certificates granted by various Family categories have been published in their annual and quarterly statistical reports which can be found here:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics
From April 2013, legal aid is now only available for private family law cases (such as contact or divorce) if there is evidence of domestic violence or child abuse and child abduction cases. Legal aid remains available for public family law cases (such as adoption).
The full details of the LASPO Act can be found here: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/10/enacted
The removal of legal aid for many private law cases has resulted in a change in the pattern of legal representation, and Figure 7 shows how this has changed over the time. Around the time that the LASPO reforms were implemented there was a marked increase in the number and proportion of cases where neither party are represented, with an equivalent drop in the proportion of those cases where both parties were represented. In the most recent quarters, there has been some volatility in the proportion of cases that have representation for the ‘applicant only’ and ‘both applicant and respondent’ representation – both appear now to be in line with the overall general trend. Quarter on quarter changes should be treated with caution.
**Figure 7: Proportion of parties in private law cases with legal representation, January to March 2011 to July to September 2015**
**Timeliness of cases by legal representation**
In general, across all case types, cases where both parties or the respondent only had legal representation took longer than those cases where only the applicant was represented or where both parties were without legal representation. Figure 8 shows the average duration by case type in July to September 2015.
**Figure 8: Timeliness of cases according to legal representation of participants, by case type, July to September 2015**
 The average duration across the representation groups for public law steadily fell since the middle of 2012 until the last twelve months when it has remained fairly steady. For adoption cases overall average duration has remained fairly constant over recent years. Note that adoption timeliness in Q3 2014 was higher because of a data cleansing exercise in some regions which administratively closed old cases.
For private law cases, the average time to first disposal was generally falling until it started to increase during 2013. This rise was driven by increases for all representation groups, but particularly in the timeliness of cases where both parties were represented. In recent quarters there has been a decrease in the timeliness for private law cases overall (Figure 9) with timeliness falling for all types of representation, aside from ‘respondent only’, which account for around 10% of cases resulting in a volatile time series. Quarter on quarter changes should therefore be treated with caution.
Figure 9: Average time to first disposal in private law cases, January to March 2011 to July to September 2015 Section 5 - Matrimonial matters
Table 7 provides the numbers of petitions and decrees granted for divorce, annulment and judicial separation in England and Wales. The CSV file that accompanies this publication provides additional information on matrimonial proceedings such as gender of petitioner and whether children were involved or not.
Over 99% of petitions filed for matrimonial proceedings are for divorce. There are small numbers of annulments and judicial separations. The number of divorces has been fairly stable at around 30,000 per quarter, but has shown a drop in recent quarters (Table 7).
In addition to caseload, there are also divorce case progression figures presented in this publication. A summary of divorce case progression can be found in Table 8 – it shows the number of divorce cases commencing in each year since 2003 and in each quarter since 2009, together with the proportion of those cases that had reached certain stages by the beginning of November 2015 (when the data was extracted for producing this bulletin).
As mentioned in the previous bulletin, in May 2015, we proposed a change to the presentation and calculation of the case progression estimates included in this statistical bulletin and requested feedback from users on these proposals:
www.gov.uk/government/statistics/changes-to-moj-statistics-case-progression
All users that provided a response to the proposals agreed that the previous methodology, which used a purely a statistical model, should be replaced.
Two alternatives for measuring and presenting timeliness are now included in this bulletin as a means of improving the quality and reliability of the published statistics. The first looks at how long it has taken (in weeks) to get to certain stages in the relevant court process from the date when the petition was made (and this is included in Table 7). The second reports how long it takes, on average, for petitions to reach each stage in the process, counted by the number of quarters elapsed (Table 9 and Figure 10).
These methods of presentation provide a better indication of case progression as they address the weaknesses identified with the previous methodology e.g. they now take account of the correlations between the percentages of claims reaching the milestones in different quarters. They also incorporate previous quarters’ data, which will reflect any recent economic or policy changes. Figure 10: Percentage of divorce cases started between Q1 2011 to Q3 2015 reaching certain stages, by the number of quarters since petition, England and Wales Financial remedy
During a divorce, a marriage annulment, or a judicial separation, or the dissolution of a civil partnership, there may still be a need for the court to settle disputes over money or property. The court can make a financial remedy order, formerly known as ‘ancillary relief’. These orders include dealing with the arrangements for the sale or transfer of property, maintenance payments, a lump sum payment or the sharing of a pension. Orders for financial provision other than for financial remedy are not dependent upon divorce proceedings and may be made for children.
There were 10,663 applications in July to September 2015, 4% higher than a year earlier (Table 10).
In July to September 2015, there were 9,713 financial remedy disposals, down 6% on the equivalent quarter in 2014, continuing the recent downward trend. During this latest period, 66% of disposals were uncontested, 26% were initially contested, and 8% were contested throughout.
In July to September 2015, property adjustment orders and lump sum orders each accounted for about a third of the total financial remedy disposal types (Table 11). Figure 11 provides a breakdown of all disposal types for the latest quarter.
Figure 11: Financial remedy disposal types, July to September 2015 Section 6 - Domestic violence remedy orders
A range of people can apply to the court for a domestic violence remedy order: spouses, cohabitants, ex-cohabitants, those who live or have lived in the same household (other than by reason of one of them being the other’s employee, tenant, lodger or boarder), certain relatives (for example, parents, grandparents, in-laws, brothers, sisters), and those who have agreed to marry one another.
Two types of order can be granted:
- a non-molestation order, which can either prohibit particular behaviour or general molestation by someone who has previously been violent towards the applicant and/or any relevant children; and,
- an occupation order, which can define or regulate rights of occupation of the home by the parties involved.
Figure 12: Applications for domestic violence remedy orders, January to March 2008 to July to September 2015
As shown in Figure 12, the number of occupation applications is showing a fairly steady trend, whilst the trend in the number of non-molestation applications is generally upward despite the drop seen in some of the recent quarters. Section 7 - Forced Marriage Protection Orders
The Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007 came into force on 25 November 2008. The Act amended Part IV of the Family Law Act to enable 15 designated courts to make Forced Marriage Protection Orders (FMPOs) to prevent forced marriages from occurring and to offer protection to victims who might have already been forced into a marriage.
The number of applications and orders made for FMPOs is very small. In July to September 2015, there were 81 applications and 77 orders made (Table 13). The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 came into force on 16 June 2014 and made it an offence to force a person to marry against their will, or to breach a FMPO.
Figure 13: Applications and disposals of Forced Marriage Protection Orders, November 2008 to July to September 2015 Section 8 – Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders
Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders (FGMPOs) are intended to safeguard girls who are at risk of FGM at home or abroad, or who are survivors. They came into effect on 17 July 2015. FGMPOs, and so figures for these orders are presented in this bulletin for the first time, covering July to September 2015 (Table 14).
In July to September 2015, there were 28 applications and 18 orders made for FGMPOs. Section 9 - Adoptions
An adoption order made by a court extinguishes the rights, duties and obligations of the natural parents or guardian and vests them in the adopters. On adoption, the child becomes for virtually all purposes in law the child of its adoptive parents and has the same rights of inheritance of property as any children born to the adoptive parents. Most adoptions in the UK are ‘standard’ adoptions. Data is also provided on other adoptions, which include foreign adoptions, convention adoptions and standard adoptions that include a foreign element. An adoption order is preceded by a placement order which allows a local authority to place a child with prospective adopters, unless parental consent has been given for the placement.
In July to September 2015, there were 1,370 applications made for a placement order and 1,563 applications made for an adoption order (Table 15).
During July to September 2015, there were 1,463 adoption orders issued, down 17% for the equivalent quarter last year. In 65% of these, the adopters were a male/female couple, while in 18% the adopter was a sole applicant. In a further 7% of orders, the adopter was a step-parent and in 10% the adopters were a same-sex couple (Figure 14). Figures on the sex and age band of adopted children can be found in Table 16 and timeliness figures can be found in Table 6. A wider range of breakdowns for adoption applications and orders, for example by type of order, can be produced from the accompanying CSV file.
Figure 14: Adoption orders issued, by adopter, January to March 2011 to July to September 2015 Section 10 – The Mental Capacity Act
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 provides a statutory framework to empower and protect vulnerable people who are not able to make their own decisions. The Act makes it clear who can take decisions, in which situations, and how they should go about this. It enables people to plan ahead for a time when they may lose capacity.
When the Mental Capacity Act 2005 came into force on 1 October 2007, the role and function of the Court of Protection (CoP) changed, and in addition, the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) was established. The OPG, an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice, supports the Public Guardian in registering Enduring Powers of Attorney (EPA), Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPA) and supervising Court of Protection appointed Deputies.
For more information on the roles of these specialised courts please see A Guide to Family Court Statistics that is published alongside this publication.
Court of Protection (Tables 17 and 18)
In July to September 2015, there were 6,545 applications made under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, down slightly on the equivalent quarter in 2014. The majority of these (57%) relate to applications for appointment of a property and affairs deputy.
There were also 7,409 orders made, an increase of 27% on July to September 2014 – the trend in orders made mirrors that of applications and has been steadily increasing since 2010. The majority (53%) of orders related to appointing a deputy for property and affairs.
Applications relating to deprivation of liberty increased from 109 in 2013 to 525 in 2014. There were 386 applications made in the latest quarter July to September, similar to the 388 for the previous quarter. The overall increase follows the Supreme Court decision on 19 March 2014 whereby it was considered a person could be deprived of their liberty in their own home, sheltered accommodation etc, and not just the nursing homes and hospitals which were previously covered. Of the 386 applications made in July to September 2015, 246 (64%) came from a Local Authority, 118 (31%) from solicitors and 22 (5%) from others including clinical commission groups, other professionals or applicants in person. Over a third (37%) of the applications were made under the streamlined process set out in Re X and others [2014] EWCOP25.
______________________________________________________________________
2 An LPA is a legal document that someone (the Donor) makes using a special form. It allows that person to choose someone in the present time, called the “Attorney”, that they trust to make decisions on their behalf, at a time in the future when they either lack the mental capacity or no longer wish to make those decisions themselves
3 P v Cheshire West and Chester Council and P and Q v Surrey County Council [2014] UKSC 19 The Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC) collects data from councils with social services responsibilities on deprivation of liberty at a case level on an annual(^4) and quarterly(^5) basis. Section 16 of the Mental Capacity Act (MCA) and Re X cases are new and considered by the court but not by Local Authorities first. Those cases which come under section 21A of the MCA 2005 are seen as appeals to the court of those who have already been assessed for deprivation of liberty and are likely to have been included in HSCIC figures.
**Figure 15: Applications and orders made under the Mental Capacity Act, January to March 2008 to July to September 2015**
**Office of the Public Guardian (Tables 19 and 20)**
There were 127,748 Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPAs) in July to September 2015, similar to the high seen in the previous quarter and up nearly 40% on the same quarter for 2014. This is largely due to increased publicity and new online forms which have been introduced to make it simpler and faster to apply for LPAs. There were 3,395 EPAs in July to September 2015, down slightly on Q3 2014. There were 4,390 Deputyships(^6) appointed in July to September 2015, an increase of 33% on the equivalent quarter in 2014.
______________________________________________________________________
(^4) [www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB14825](http://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB14825) Mandatory collection
(^5) [www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB17509](http://www.hscic.gov.uk/catalogue/PUB17509) Voluntary collection of number of DoLs applications, the number granted and the number not granted
(^6) Deputyships - A Deputy is legally responsible for acting and making decisions on behalf of a person who lacks capacity to make decisions for themselves. The Deputy order sets out specific powers in relation to the person who lacks capacity. Of LPAs registered in July to September 2015, 39% were for males – see Table 20. The most common age group applying for an LPA is 81-90 years, as shown in Figure 17. Section 11 – The Probate Service
When a person dies somebody has to deal with their estate (money, property and possessions left) by collecting in all the money, paying any debts and distributing what is left to those people entitled to it. Probate is the court’s authority; given to a person or persons to administer a deceased person’s estate and the document issued by the Probate Service is called a Grant of Representation. This document is usually required by the asset holders as proof to show the correct person or persons have the Probate Service’s authority to administer a deceased person’s estate.
In July to September 2015, 74,676 grants of representation were issued (Table 21). Grants of representation are known as either:
- Probate (when the deceased person left a valid will and an executor is acting). These made up 79% of grants in Q3 2015.
- Letters of administration with will (when a person has left a valid will but no executor is acting). These made up 6% of grants in Q3 2015.
- Letters of administration (usually when there is no valid will). These made up 14% of grants in Q3 2015.
These different types of grants of representation appoint people known as personal representatives to administer the deceased person’s estate.
Figure 18: Grants of representation issued by the Probate Service, 2007 to 2014
[Graph showing the number of grants issued from 2007 to 2014]
7 www.justice.gov.uk/courts/probate/gor In July to September 2015, 64% of applications were made by solicitors and 36% were personal applications.
**Current structure of the Probate Service**
The Probate Service is currently made up of:
- The Principal Registry in London
- 11 District Probate Registries
- 18 Probate Sub-Registries situated throughout England and Wales
In July to September 2015, 7% of grants were issued by the Principal Registry and 93% by District Registries and Sub-Registries.
When a probate case is contested, The Chancery Division of the High Court deals with the matter. See the Guide to Court and Administrative Justice Statistics for more information on The Chancery Division. There were 26 contested cases in July to September 2015. Contacts
Press enquiries on the contents of this bulletin should be directed to the MoJ or HMCTS press offices:
**Sebastian Walters**\
Tel: 020 3334 3529\
Email: sebastian.walters@justice.gsi.gov.uk
**Mark Kram**\
Tel: 020 3334 6697\
Email: mark.kram@hmcts.gsi.gov.uk
Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the MoJ:
**Bridgette Miles**
Ministry of Justice\
102 Petty France\
London\
SW1H 9AJ\
Tel: 020 3334 4571\
Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
General enquiries about the statistics work of the MoJ can be emailed to statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
General information about the official statistics system of the UK is available from statisticsauthority.gov.uk/about-the-authority/uk-statistical-system
© Crown copyright\
Produced by the Ministry of Justice\
Alternative formats are available on request from statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2599-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 29,
"total-input-tokens": 48343,
"total-output-tokens": 9555,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
0,
1
],
[
0,
976,
2
],
[
976,
3140,
3
],
[
3140,
4661,
4
],
[
4661,
7059,
5
],
[
7059,
7451,
6
],
[
7451,
8535,
7
],
[
8535,
10325,
8
],
[
10325,
11691,
9
],
[
11691,
13273,
10
],
[
13273,
13415,
11
],
[
13415,
14791,
12
],
[
14791,
16098,
13
],
[
16098,
18793,
14
],
[
18793,
19721,
15
],
[
19721,
20848,
16
],
[
20848,
23269,
17
],
[
23269,
23428,
18
],
[
23428,
24707,
19
],
[
24707,
25833,
20
],
[
25833,
26671,
21
],
[
26671,
27137,
22
],
[
27137,
28744,
23
],
[
28744,
31511,
24
],
[
31511,
33362,
25
],
[
33362,
33528,
26
],
[
33528,
34970,
27
],
[
34970,
35697,
28
],
[
35697,
36666,
29
]
]
} |
7f04115d0e0242eaecb8c652fa8821b85b60603b | Contents
Contents 1 Introduction 2 Key Findings 4 Section 1 - The Family Justice System 5 Section 2 - Public Law 6 Section 3 - Private Law 12 Section 4 - Legal representation 14 Section 5 - Matrimonial matters 17 Section 6 - Domestic violence remedy orders 20 Section 7 - Forced Marriage Protection Orders 21 Section 8 - Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders 22 Section 9 - Adoptions 23 Section 10 - The Mental Capacity Act 24 Section 11 - The Probate Service 28 Contacts 30 Introduction
This statistical bulletin presents statistics on activity in the family courts of England and Wales and provides provisional figures for the latest quarter (April to June 2016) with accompanying commentary and analysis. The figures give a summary overview of the volume of cases dealt with by these courts over time, with statistics also broken down for the main types of case involved. Detailed statistics and historic time series can be found in the accompanying Excel tables.
The statistics in this bulletin are used to monitor court workloads, to assist in the development of policy, and their subsequent monitoring and evaluation.
Information on civil cases can be found here:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/civil-justice-statistics
Information on criminal cases can be found here:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/criminal-justice-statistics
Information on publicly funding legal services is now published by the Legal Aid Agency and can be found here:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics
There is also a separate Guide to Family Court Statistics published alongside this publication which provides definitions for the terms used in this report, information regarding the symbols and conventions used in the bulletin, as well as information about the systems and data sources used to compile the statistics.
Family Court Statistics Visualisation Tool
As part of our wider work on improving data visualisation and accessibility, we have developed a data visualisation tool which sits on top of the data underlying the publication and its associated csv files – the tool provides users with the capability to:
- interrogate the published information at a lower level of detail; and
- produce bespoke charts specific to their user requirements.
The tool can be found here:
https://public.tableau.com/profile/moj.analysis#!/vizhome/FamilyCourtstatistics2016Q2/Frontpage
We are seeking views on how effectively the data visualisation tool:
- better meets user needs; and
- improves the dissemination of information. As well as requesting feedback on the data visualisation tool, the structure and content of this report are continually being reviewed to reflect user requirements. If you have any feedback about the report generally, please contact the production team using the contact details at the back of this report.
Previous editions of Family Court Statistics Quarterly can be found at:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/family-court-statistics-quarterly
Earlier editions of the information presented in this bulletin prior to July 2014 are in the Family chapters of the Court Statistics Quarterly publications which can be found at:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/court-statistics-quarterly
There are a number of CSV files that support this publication, in the accompanying zip file. Further information about these files can be found in the word document ‘Guide to Family Justice - Guide to national and court-level information.doc’, which is also included in the zip file. The CSV files contain:
- Selected summary of family cases by Designated Family Judge area and region.
- Additional breakdowns and further details for each of the ‘main tables’ published alongside this document.
The next edition of Family Court Statistics Quarterly is scheduled to be published on 15 December 2016, covering the period July to September 2016.
**Users of the statistics**
The main users of these statistics are Ministers and officials in central government responsible for developing policy with regard to family justice. Other users include the central government departments, and various voluntary organisations with an interest in family justice. The data also feed into statistics produced by the Office for National Statistics, such as public sector productivity. Key Findings
This report presents statistics on activity in the family courts of England and Wales in the second quarter of 2016 (April to June).
- 66,328 cases started in family courts in England and Wales in April to June 2016, a 10% increase from the same quarter in 2015.
- The number of public law cases started has increased by 24% over the last 12 months from 3,896 to 4,833 in April to June 2016. Similarly, the number of children involved in public law applications increased by 21% over the same period to 8,972.
- The number of private law cases started in April to June 2016 increased by 16% from the equivalent quarter in 2015 to 12,203.
- The average time for the disposal of divorce cases with financial remedy has been steadily increasing from 20.5 weeks at the start of 2015 to 24.9 weeks in April to June 2016.
- The average time for the disposal of a care or supervision application made in April to June 2016 was 27 weeks, remaining steady over the past year.
- 60% of care or supervision proceedings were disposed of within 26 weeks, following on from the 26 week time limit introduced in the Children and Families Act 2014.
- The number of applications for domestic violence remedy orders has remained stable over the last year at around 4,700 non-molestation and 1,200 occupation applications.
- Following their introduction in July 2015, there have been 77 applications and 68 orders made for Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders (FGMPOs) up to the end of June 2016.
- 1,429 applications were made for an adoption order, down 4% from the same quarter in 2015.
- There has been a steady upward trend in the number of applications and orders made under the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and a 13% increase in applications in the latest quarter from April to June 2015.
- Applications relating to deprivation of liberty doubled over the last 12 months from 386 made in April to June 2015 to 743 in the latest quarter.
- There were 149,539 Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPAs) in April to June 2016, the highest quarterly figure so far and up 16% on the same quarter for 2015. Section 1 - The Family Justice System
Until 22 April 2014, family cases were dealt with at Family Proceedings Courts (which were part of the magistrates’ courts), at county courts or in the Family Division of the High Court. From 22 April 2014, all family cases are now dealt with in the Single Family Court.
Family courts deal with cases such as: parental disputes (Private Law), local authority intervention to protect children (Public Law), matrimonial cases such as divorce petitions, the financial provisions for children after divorce or relationship breakdown, domestic violence remedies and adoption.
Total family court case caseload
In April to June 2016, 66,328 new cases started in family courts, an increase of 10% from the equivalent quarter in 2015. Figure 1 below shows the trend in cases started over time by case type from April to June 2011 to April to June 2016. There has been a particularly large rise in the number of public and private law cases (24% and 16% respectively). Matrimonial cases (divorce) consist of nearly half of all new cases starting in the family courts.
Table 1 (in the accompanying Excel tables) shows the total number of new cases starting and cases reaching a conclusion in family courts in each quarter from 2011. There were 60,373 cases disposed in April to June 2016.
Figure 1: New family cases started, by case type, January to March 2011 to April to June 2016 Timeliness by Case Type
Figure 2 shows the average number of weeks to first disposal across the different case types in the family courts. In 2011, public law cases took almost twice as long as other case types (50 weeks). However, from 2012 the average number of weeks to reach a first disposal fell steadily to 27.4 weeks by Q2 2014 (April to June). It has since remained fairly stable, although since April to June 2015 there has been a further drop of 1.7 weeks to 25.9 weeks in the latest quarter (Table 6).
Timeliness for private law, domestic violence, divorce (no financial remedy) and adoption have remained fairly stable over recent quarters. The time taken to first disposal in divorce cases with financial remedy has increased by 3.7 weeks over the last 12 months to 24.9 weeks in April to June 2016. This follows a long period of stability at around 20 weeks and may be due to the clearance of a backlog of cases following the creation of the new centralised divorce centre for London and the South East region during 2015. Note that adoption timeliness in Q3 2014 was higher because of a data cleansing exercise in some regions which administratively closed old cases.
Detailed figures are available in Table 6 and timeliness by legal representation figures are provided in Section 4.
Figure 2: Timeliness for proceedings in the Family Court by case type, January to March 2011 to April to June 2016 Section 2 - Public Law
Public law cases are those brought by local authorities or, very rarely, an authorised person to protect the child and ensure they get the care they need. They can apply for a range of different orders, including a care or supervision order which determines whether the child should be looked after or supervised by the local authority, or an emergency protection order which allows an individual or local authority to take a child away from a place where they are in immediate danger to a place of safety.
Following the publicity surrounding the Baby P case(^1), the number of children involved in public law applications made by local authorities jumped from around 20,000 to almost 26,000 in 2009 and subsequently to 29,500 in 2011 (Table 2). Figures have remained fairly steady at around 7,000 per quarter, but there has been an increase over the last 12 months, with 8,972 children involved in public law applications in April to June 2016, an increase of 21% from the equivalent quarter in 2015 (Figure 3). Each region has experienced a rise in the number of children involved in public law applications, although the size of the increase varies from 7% in the South-West to 44% in London and 54% in Wales. We are looking into the reasons behind the recent increases in public law applications.
Figure 3: Public law applications: number of children involved, number of application events and number of cases started, January to March 2011 to April to June 2016
(^1)web.archive.org/web/20081208061525/http://www.haringey.gov.uk:80/index/news_and_events/latest_news/chida.htm More than one application may be made during the life of a case. The number of public law cases started increased by 24% to 4,833 in April to June 2016 compared to the same quarter in 2015. The number of applications made, which can cover more than one child, was 5,179 in April to June 2016 - on average, there were 1.7 children involved in each application.
There were 10,934 children involved in public law orders made in April to June 2016. The number of orders made is generally higher than the number of applications made as some orders relate to applications made in an earlier time period, and an application for one type of order can result in multiple orders being made.
Figure 4 shows that the most common type of order applied for in April to June 2016 was for care (73% of children involved in applications). There is often a different pattern between the types of order applied for and the orders that are given because an application for one type can result in an order of a different type being made. For example, there were 571 children involved in applications for a supervision order in April to June 2016, compared to 1,912 children involved in supervision orders made in that same quarter (Table 3). This is because some supervision orders made resulted from an application for a different order type. Care and supervision orders made up half of the total orders made in April to June 2016.
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) also publishes data on the number of care applications, the latest edition of which can be found here:
www.cafcass.gov.uk/leaflets-resources/organisational-material/care-and-private-law-demand-statistics/care-demand-statistics.aspx
Case level care order figures are currently not produced by the MoJ and so comparisons between the two datasets cannot be made at this time. Figure 4: Public law applications and orders made, showing the percentage of children involved in each order type, April to June 2016
Timeliness of care proceedings
Statistics on the time taken to complete care and supervision cases in the family courts of England and Wales are given in Table 5. This table presents summary statistics showing the time, in weeks, between the date an application for a care or supervision order was lodged and the date the first care, supervision, or other substantive order was made in the case, for those cases disposed of during each quarter.
A long term downward trend seen since 2011 reduced the average time for a disposal to be made to around 29 weeks in Q3 2014 (July to September), and then dropped again slightly to 27.5 weeks at the end of 2015 (Table 5). This figure has remained fairly constant in the latest quarter at 27 weeks (Figure 5).
The Children and Families Act 2014 introduced a 26 week time limit for completing care and supervision proceedings. 60% of care or supervision proceedings disposed in April to June 2016 were within this limit. The average time for a disposal can be skewed by cases that take a long time, and so the median time is also calculated. The median time to make a disposal in a case was 25 weeks for all children involved in care and supervision proceedings where a decision was reached during April to June 2016. This indicates that half of the children waited 25 weeks or less from application to a substantive disposal, and the other half waited at least 25 weeks. This median value is different to the average (mean) quoted in the paragraph above as it is not influenced by the few very long case durations.
Figure 6 shows how many children were involved in each timeliness band in their case proceedings for cases disposed in April to June 2016. Figure 6: Timeliness for care and supervision proceedings showing number of children involved in each timeliness band, April to June 2016 Section 3 - Private Law
Private law cases are those court cases between two or more private individuals who are trying to resolve a dispute. This is generally where parents have split up and there is a disagreement about who the children should live with and have contact or otherwise spend time with.
The number of private law cases started in April to June 2016 increased by 16% from the equivalent quarter in 2015 from 10,496 to 12,203 (Table 2). The number of children involved in applications also increased by 16% over the same period to 26,364. These increases are evident across all regions in England and Wales.
The number of children involved in private law orders made in April to June 2016 was 40,330, similar to the same quarter in 2015.
The Children and Family Court Advisory and Support Service (Cafcass) also publishes (England only) data on the number of private law cases started, the latest edition of which can be found here:
www.cafcass.gov.uk/leaflets-resources/organisational-material/care-and-private-law-demand-statistics/private-law-demand-statistics.aspx
Figure 7 compares both Cafcass and MoJ figures and shows that the two trends are very similar. For the last two years MoJ figures have been, on average, 9% higher.
Figure 7: Comparison of the number of private law cases received, as recorded by Cafcass and the MoJ (England only), January to March 2012 to April to June 2016 This is mostly due to Cafcass only receiving Section 8 cases(^2) from the courts. Other differences between the two data sets include the following:
- Section 8 cases where all of the issues are dealt with on the day (called ‘urgent without notice’ applications) should not be sent to Cafcass.
- Section 8 cases which are not listed within the Private Law Programme (PLP) and do not have a first hearing dispute resolution appointment (FHDRA) should also not be sent to Cafcass.
- Certain non-section 8 cases can be sent to Cafcass if the subject child is a party to ongoing proceedings (and a Cafcass officer has been appointed as the children’s guardian) or the court is directed to do so by a judge or legal advisor.
This accounts for the discrepancy between the two data sets which cannot be accurately matched as it is impossible to identify the various situations described above from administrative data sources (particularly the ‘urgent without notice’ applications).
**Timeliness of private law cases**
As shown in Figure 2 and Table 6, from the middle of 2012 to the end of March 2014 the average time to first definitive disposal had been on a slight upward trend for private law cases overall. This trend then reversed with the average time to first disposal at 14.5 weeks for 2015 overall, down 2.4 weeks from the 2014 overall average. For the most recent quarter, April to June 2016, the average time to first disposal was 13.7 weeks, down 1 week from the equivalent quarter in 2015.
______________________________________________________________________
(^2) Under the Children Act 1989, Section 8 orders refer to child arrangement orders (contact and residence), prohibited steps and specific issue orders. Section 4 - Legal representation
Figures on the legal representation of parties in family-related court cases are shown in Table 6. This gives the number of disposals made during each quarter and the average duration between application and first substantive disposal, for divorce, public law, private law, adoption and domestic violence cases, according to whether the applicant(s), respondent(s), both or neither had legal representation during the case. A further breakdown of Table 6 by region is published in the CSV files that accompany this publication.
The legal representation status reflects whether the applicant/respondent's legal representative has been recorded or left blank within FamilyMan, the family court case management system. A blank field is assumed to indicate that no legal representation has been used. Table 6 suggests that for over half of divorce cases not involving financial remedies disposed, neither party had legal representation. However, further analysis shows that these were uncontested cases and almost all of them did not have a single hearing. Therefore, parties recorded as without legal representation are not necessarily self-representing litigants in person.
Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offender Act, 2012
The implementation of the Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act (LASPO) in April 2013 made changes to the scope and eligibility of legal aid. From April 2013, legal aid is now only available for private family law cases (such as contact or divorce) if there is evidence of domestic violence or child abuse and child abduction cases. Legal aid remains available for public family law cases (such as adoption).
The full details of the LASPO Act can be found here: www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/10/enacted
The removal of legal aid for many private law cases has resulted in a change in the pattern of legal representation, and Figure 8 shows how this has changed over time. Around the time that the LASPO reforms were implemented there was a marked increase in the number and proportion of cases where neither party were represented, with an equivalent drop in the proportion of cases where both parties were represented. In April to June 2016, neither the applicant nor respondent had legal representation in 34% of private law cases, an increase of 17 percentage points from April to June 2013. Correspondingly, the proportion of cases where both parties had legal representation dropped by 13 percentage points over the same time period. The Legal Aid Agency (LAA - formerly the Legal Services Commission) collects statistics on those applying for legal aid, and figures on the number of applications received and certificates granted by various Family categories have been published in their annual and quarterly statistical reports, which can be found here:
www.gov.uk/government/collections/legal-aid-statistics
**Timeliness of cases by legal representation**
In general, across all case types, cases where either both parties or the respondent only had legal representation took longer than those cases where only the applicant was represented or where both parties were without legal representation. Figure 9 shows the average duration by case type in April to June 2016.
For private law cases, the average time to first disposal started to increase during 2013. This rise was driven by increases for all representation groups, but particularly in the timeliness of cases where both parties were represented (Figure 10). This trend reversed during 2014 and by the start of 2015, the average time to first disposal had returned to pre-2013 levels. Timeliness in April to June 2016 for private law cases overall is similar to the equivalent quarter in 2015. This is true across all representation types, except ‘applicant only’ where the average time to first disposal dropped 1.6 weeks. It is important to note that quarter on quarter changes should be treated with caution, particularly for ‘respondent only’ which accounts for 10% of cases and is a volatile time series. Figure 9: Timeliness of cases according to legal representation of participants, by case type, April to June 2016
![Bar chart showing average duration of cases by legal representation and case type.]
Figure 10: Average time to first disposal in private law cases, January to March 2011 to April to June 2016
![Line chart showing average time to first disposal by case type and quarter.] Section 5 - Matrimonial matters
Table 7 provides the numbers of petitions and decrees granted for divorce, annulment and judicial separation in England and Wales. The National CSV file and the data visualisation tool that accompanies this publication provide additional information on matrimonial proceedings such as gender of petitioner and whether children were involved or not.
Eleven centralised divorce centres were introduced throughout 2014 and 2015 in England and Wales, with the vast majority of uncontested decree nisi applications being considered by legal advisers (rather than district judges) at those centres. This should be noted when looking at the relevant figures given in the DFJ and Region level CSV file.
There were 30,482 petitions in April to June 2016. Over 99% of petitions filed for matrimonial proceedings are for divorce. There are very small numbers for annulments and judicial separations. There were 28,503 decrees nisi and 29,292 decrees absolutes granted in April to June 2016, both of which have increased by around 10% from the same quarter in 2015 (Table 7). This increase is due to the clearance of a backlog following the creation of the new centralised divorce centre for London and the South East Region during 2015.
Divorce case progression can be found in Table 8, which shows the number of divorce cases commencing in each year since 2003 and in each quarter since 2009, together with the proportion of those cases that had reached certain stages by the beginning of August 2016 (when the data was extracted for producing this bulletin).
Following consultation, two alternatives for measuring and presenting timeliness are now produced. The first looks at how long it has taken (in weeks) to get to certain stages in the relevant court process from the date when the petition was made (Table 7). The second reports how long it takes, on average, for petitions to reach each stage in the process, counted by the number of quarters elapsed (Table 9 and Figure 11).
These methods of presentation provide a better indication of case progression as they address the weaknesses identified with the previous methodology e.g. they now take account of the correlations between the percentages of claims reaching the milestones in different quarters. They also incorporate previous quarters’ data, which will reflect any recent economic or policy changes. Figure 11: Percentage of divorce cases started between Q1 2011 to Q2 2016 reaching certain stages, by the number of quarters since petition
Over one-third (34%) of divorce petitions made after January 2011 reached Decree Nisi in the first quarter after the petition and a further third (36%) reached this stage within two quarters. Over half of the petitions reached Decree Absolute within three quarters after petition (34% within 1 to 2 quarters after petition and 18% within 2 to 3 quarters). Financial remedy
During a divorce, a marriage annulment, or a judicial separation, or the dissolution of a civil partnership, there may still be a need for the court to settle disputes over money or property. The court can make a financial remedy order, formerly known as ‘ancillary relief’. These orders include dealing with the arrangements for the sale or transfer of property, maintenance payments, a lump sum payment or the sharing of a pension. Orders for financial provision other than for financial remedy are not dependent upon divorce proceedings and may be made for children.
There were 11,841 applications in April to June 2016, a 13% increase from the equivalent quarter in 2015 (Table 10).
In April to June 2016, there were 9,972 financial remedy disposals, similar to the equivalent quarter in 2015. During this latest period, 69% of disposals were uncontested, 21% were initially contested, and 10% were contested throughout.
As shown in Figure 12, in April to June 2016, property adjustment orders and lump sum orders accounted for more than half (56%) of the total financial remedy disposal types (Table 11).
Figure 12: Financial remedy disposal types, April to June 2016 Section 6 - Domestic violence remedy orders
A range of people can apply to the court for a domestic violence remedy order: spouses, cohabitants, ex-cohabitants, those who live or have lived in the same household (other than by reason of one of them being the other’s employee, tenant, lodger or boarder), certain relatives (for example, parents, grandparents, in-laws, brothers, sisters), and those who have agreed to marry one another.
Two types of order can be granted:
- a non-molestation order, which can either prohibit particular behaviour or general molestation by someone who has previously been violent towards the applicant and/or any relevant children,
- an occupation order, which can define or regulate rights of occupation of the home by the parties involved.
Figure 13: Applications for domestic violence remedy orders, January to March 2008 to April to June 2016
As shown in Figure 13, since 2011 the number of occupation applications have remained fairly steady, whilst for non-molestation applications there was a general increasing trend until the end of 2013. Over the last year, the number of non-molestation applications has remained at around 4,700 per quarter (Table 12). Section 7 - Forced Marriage Protection Orders
The Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007 came into force on 25 November 2008. The Act amended Part IV of the Family Law Act to enable 15 designated courts to make Forced Marriage Protection Orders (FMPOs) to prevent forced marriages from occurring and to offer protection to victims who might have already been forced into a marriage.
The number of applications and orders made for FMPOs is very small. Consequently, as Figure 14 shows, numbers fluctuate each quarter but overall there has been an increasing trend since their introduction in 2008. In April to June 2016, there were 89 applications and 65 orders made (Table 13). The Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 came into force on 16 June 2014 and made it an offence to force a person to marry against their will, or to breach a FMPO. As a result, courts no longer need to attach a power of arrest to an FMPO.
Figure 14: Applications and disposals of Forced Marriage Protection Orders, November 2008 to April to June 2016 Section 8 – Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders
Female Genital Mutilation Protection Orders (FGMPOs) are intended to safeguard girls who are at risk of FGM at home or abroad, or who are survivors. They came into effect on 17 July 2015, and quarterly figures for these orders are presented in this bulletin for the third time (Table 14).
In April to June 2016, there were 17 applications and 22 orders made for FGMPOs. In total, there have been 77 applications and 68 orders made since their introduction up to the end of June 2016. Section 9 - Adoptions
An adoption order made by a court eradicates the rights, duties and obligations of the natural parents or guardian and transfers them to the adopters. On adoption, the child becomes for virtually all purposes in law the child of its adoptive parents. Most adoptions in the UK are 'standard' adoptions. Data is also provided on other adoptions, which include foreign adoptions, convention adoptions and standard adoptions that include a foreign element. An adoption order is preceded by a placement order which allows a local authority to place a child with prospective adopters, unless parental consent has been given for the placement.
There was a long-term rise in adoption applications and orders from 2011 until mid-2014, with applications and orders 40% higher for 2014 overall compared to 2011 (Tables 15-16). Numbers have since declined, although this decrease has slowed in recent quarters. During April to June 2016, there were 1,429 applications made for an adoption order and 1,483 adoption orders were issued.
Two-thirds of adoption orders (69%) were issued to male/female couples, 16% to sole applicants, 8% to same-sex couples and a further 7% to step-parents (Figure 15). Figures on the sex and age band of adopted children can be found in Table 16 and timeliness figures can be found in Table 6. A wider range of breakdowns for adoption applications and orders, by for example type of order, can be produced from the accompanying data visualisation tool or CSV file.
Figure 15: Adoption orders issued, by adopter, January to March 2011 to April to June 2016 Section 10 – The Mental Capacity Act
The Mental Capacity Act 2005 provides a statutory framework to empower and protect vulnerable people who are not able to make their own decisions. The Act makes it clear who can take decisions, in which situations, and how they should go about this. It enables people to plan ahead for a time when they may lose capacity.
When the Mental Capacity Act 2005 came into force on 1 October 2007, the role and function of the Court of Protection (CoP) changed, and in addition, the Office of the Public Guardian (OPG) was established. The OPG, an executive agency of the Ministry of Justice, supports the Public Guardian in registering Enduring Powers of Attorney (EPA), Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPA) and supervising Court of Protection appointed Deputies.
For more information on the roles of these specialised courts please see A Guide to Family Court Statistics that is published alongside this publication.
Court of Protection
In April to June 2016, there were 7,616 applications made under the Mental Capacity Act 2005, up 13% on the equivalent quarter in 2015. The majority of these (54%) related to applications for appointment of a property and affairs deputy (Table 17).
Following the introduction of new forms in July 2015, applicants must make separate applications for ‘property and affairs’ and ‘personal welfare’. This is why there have been almost no ‘hybrid deputy’ applications in 2016.
There were 6,700 orders made, 13% lower than the same quarter in 2015. Most (53%) of the orders related to the appointment of a deputy for property and affairs (Table 18). The trend in orders made mirrors that of applications and has been steadily increasing since 2010. Applications relating to deprivation of liberty increased from 109 in 2013 to 525 in 2014 to 1,497 in 2015. There were 743 applications made in the most recent quarter, double the number made in April to June 2015. The overall increase follows the Supreme Court decision on 19 March 2014(^3) whereby it was considered a person could be deprived of their liberty in their own home, sheltered accommodation etc., and not just the nursing homes and hospitals which were previously covered. Of the 743 applications made in April to June 2016, 528 (71%) came from a Local Authority, 179 (24%) from solicitors and 36 (5%) from others including clinical commission groups, other professionals or applicants in person. In *Re X and others [2014]* EWCOP25(^4), the Court of Protection set out a new streamlined process to enable court to deal with deprivation of liberty cases in a timely and just fashion. Over half (55%) of applications for deprivation of liberty were made under this process.
NHS Digital publishes official statistics on the Mental Capacity Act 2005, Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards data collection(^5). This includes any application to local authorities reported to NHS Digital that was received, processed or considered to be “active” in any way during the year.
______________________________________________________________________
(^3) *P v Cheshire West and Chester Council and P and Q v Surrey County Council* [2014] UKSC 19
(^4) [www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCOP/2014/25.html](http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCOP/2014/25.html)
(^5) [digital.nhs.uk/searchcatalogue?q=title%3A%22Mental+Capacity+Act+2005%2C+Deprivation+of+Liberty+Safeguards+Assessments%22+%21Bi-annual+%21analysis&area=&size=10&sort=Relevance](http://digital.nhs.uk/searchcatalogue?q=title%3A%22Mental+Capacity+Act+2005%2C+Deprivation+of+Liberty+Safeguards+Assessments%22+%21Bi-annual+%21analysis&area=&size=10&sort=Relevance) Office of the Public Guardian
There were 149,539 Lasting Powers of Attorney (LPAs) received in April to June 2016, the highest quarterly figure so far and up 16% on the same quarter for 2015 as shown in Figure 17 and Table 19. The recent increases are largely due to increased publicity and new online forms which have been introduced to make it simpler and faster to apply for LPAs. There were 3,244 EPAs in April to June 2016, down 11% on April to June 2015. There were 3,671 Deputyships(^6) appointed in April to June 2016, similar to the equivalent quarter in 2015.
Figure 17: Powers of attorney received, January to March 2008 to April to June 2016
Of all LPAs registered at the end of June 2016, 38% were for males – see Table 20. The most common age group applying for an LPA is 81-90 years, as shown in Figure 18 below.
______________________________________________________________________
(^6) Deputyships - A Deputy is legally responsible for acting and making decisions on behalf of a person who lacks capacity to make decisions for themselves. The Deputy order sets out specific powers in relation to the person who lacks capacity. Figure 18: Age of LPA donors registered as at end of June 2016 Section 11 – The Probate Service
When a person dies, somebody has to deal with their estate (money, property and possessions) by collecting it together, paying any debts and distributing the remainder to those who are entitled to receive it. The Probate Service gives a person or persons the authority to do this by issuing a document called a Grant of Representation.
In April to June 2016, 67,667 grants of representation were issued (Table 21). Grants of representation are known as either:
- Probate (when the deceased person left a valid will and an executor is acting). These made up 79% of grants in April to June 2016.
- Letters of administration with will (when a person has left a valid will but no executor is acting). These made up 6% of grants in April to June 2016.
- Letters of administration (usually when there is no valid will). These made up 15% of grants in April to June 2016.
These different types of grants of representation appoint people known as personal representatives to administer the deceased person’s estate.
Over a quarter of a million grants of representation were issued in 2015, up 11% on 2014 and the highest since 2007 (Table 22). As Figure 19 shows, this was driven by a rise in the number of probate grants, which account for more than three-quarters of grants made.
In April to June 2016, 64% of applications were made by solicitors and 36% were personal applications.
______________________________________________________________________
7 [www.justice.gov.uk/courts/probate/gor](http://www.justice.gov.uk/courts/probate/gor) Current structure of the Probate Service
The Probate Service is currently made up of:
- The Principal Registry in London
- 11 District Probate Registries
- 18 Probate Sub-Registries situated throughout England and Wales
In April to June 2016, 6% of grants were issued by the Principal Registry and 94% by District Registries and Sub-Registries.
When a probate case is contested, The Chancery Division of the High Court deals with the matter. See the Guide to Court and Administrative Justice Statistics for more information on The Chancery Division. In 2015, there were 164 contested probate cases. Contacts
Press enquiries on the contents of this bulletin should be directed to the MoJ or HMCTS press offices:
**Sebastian Walters**\
Tel: 020 3334 3529\
Email: sebastian.walters@justice.gsi.gov.uk
**Camilla Marshall**\
Tel: 0203 334 3531\
Email: camilla.marshall@justice.gsi.gov.uk
Other enquiries about these statistics should be directed to the Justice Statistics Analytical Services division of the MoJ:
**Bridgette Miles**
Ministry of Justice\
102 Petty France\
London\
SW1H 9AJ\
Tel: 07809405481\
Email: statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
General enquiries about the statistics work of the MoJ can be emailed to statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
General information about the official statistics system of the UK is available from statisticsauthority.gov.uk/about-the-authority/uk-statistical-system
© Crown copyright\
Produced by the Ministry of Justice\
Alternative formats are available on request from statistics.enquiries@justice.gsi.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/2600-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 31,
"total-input-tokens": 59934,
"total-output-tokens": 10404,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
0,
1
],
[
0,
482,
2
],
[
482,
2551,
3
],
[
2551,
4315,
4
],
[
4315,
6424,
5
],
[
6424,
7840,
6
],
[
7840,
9258,
7
],
[
9258,
10869,
8
],
[
10869,
12728,
9
],
[
12728,
13829,
10
],
[
13829,
14564,
11
],
[
14564,
14702,
12
],
[
14702,
16116,
13
],
[
16116,
17784,
14
],
[
17784,
20312,
15
],
[
20312,
21855,
16
],
[
21855,
22245,
17
],
[
22245,
24641,
18
],
[
24641,
25138,
19
],
[
25138,
26333,
20
],
[
26333,
27534,
21
],
[
27534,
28585,
22
],
[
28585,
29127,
23
],
[
29127,
30727,
24
],
[
30727,
32443,
25
],
[
32443,
34308,
26
],
[
34308,
35395,
27
],
[
35395,
35458,
28
],
[
35458,
36968,
29
],
[
36968,
37571,
30
],
[
37571,
38554,
31
]
]
} |
04d8eea6bffaafb4ff008d52021e743e0961d989 | WINCLE GRANGE WINCLE CHESHIRE
HERITAGE STATEMENT
November 2014
PETER DE FIGUEIREDO HISTORIC BUILDINGS ADVISER
1 Ingestre Road, Oxton, Wirral CH43 5TZ T: 0151 652 1027 M: 0771 7291947 E: peter@defigueiredo.co.uk W: www.defigueiredo.co.uk 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Wincle Grange Farmhouse is a Grade II\* listed building. Three separate farm buildings, described variously as Barn southwest of Wincle Grange, Barn west of Wincle Grange and Farm Building southeast of Wincle Grange are listed at Grade II. The property is set in a spectacular location within the Peak District National Park.
1.2 The property was acquired by the present owner, Mrs Carole Malkin and her late husband in the mid 1970s. It had previously belonged to Mr Malkin’s father, who bought it in the 1950s from the Swythamley Estate as a tenant farmer.
1.3 The property was in very poor condition when they acquired it, and over many years they carried out extensive repairs. These works included structural repairs, re-roofing, re-pointing of stonework, repair and replacement of decayed windows and doors, installation of new rainwater goods, re-wiring, new plumbing and insulation. With the large size of the property, its state of disrepair, and the limited income they received from farming, the Malkins phased the work over a long period of time.
1.4 In 2004 Mr Malkin was diagnosed with a terminal illness which became life-threatening in 2012, at which time they resolved to sell the property. On 7 January 2013 at a meeting at Wincle Grange with planning officers from the Peak District National Park Authority arranged to discuss the possibility of alternative use of the agricultural buildings by prospective purchasers, it was alleged that listed building control had been breached by carrying out alterations to the listed buildings without the requisite consent. Subsequent to the meeting a Schedule of Unauthorised Works was issued by the Authority requiring remediation and the submission of an application for listed building consent for various alterations made to the buildings.
1.5 In May 2013 Mr Malkin died, since when discussions have been held on behalf of Mrs Malkin in order to reach an accommodation with the Authority on the outstanding matters, so that she has the freedom to sell the property in the future. This has resulted in the current application for listed building consent, which is supported by this heritage statement.
2 HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
2.1 Wincle Grange began its life as a monastic grange for Combermere Abbey, a Cistercian foundation in South Cheshire. Ranulph III, earl of Chester, gave land at Wincle to establish a grange for the Abbey, probably during the first half of the 13th century.
2.2 During the 14th century the Abbey, along with its granges, was taken over by the Crown on more than one occasion due to financial problems. In the mid 14th century William de Praers leased Wincle Grange but in 1354 the lease was taken over by the Black Prince and was returned to the Abbey. 2.3 Combermere Abbey was dissolved in 1538 at which time Wincle Grange again became the possession of the Crown. It subsequently passed through a number of local families, and in 1851 was acquired by the Brocklehurst family, who held the nearby Swythmaley Hall estate from the early 19th century until the 1970s. Wincle Grange formed part of that estate until it was bought by the current owner’s family, who were formerly the tenant farmers. Reliant on farming income, they had limited resources to restore the buildings, and this remains the case today.
3 RELEVANT LISTED BUILDING LAW
3.1 Listed buildings are buildings which are included in a list approved by the Secretary of State. For the purposes of the law, a listed building comprises the building itself, any object or structure fixed to the building and any object or structure within the curtilage that forms part of the land and has done so since before 1 July 1948.
3.2 It is unlawful to demolish a listed building, or to carry out alterations (internally or externally) that affect its special architectural or historic interest without Listed Building Consent (LBC).
3.3 The law takes the view that LBC should be sought where there is a possibility that the special architectural or historic interest of a building could be damaged by any proposed works. It is a matter of fact and degree when determining whether any alterations actually affect the building’s character, and it is at the discretions of the Local Planning Authority (LPA) as to whether it brings any enforcement action. If the LPA believes that the works affect the special architectural or historical character of the building, it is entitled to take enforcement action regardless of when the works were carried out.
4 LISTED STATUS OF WINCLE GRANGE AND FARM BUILDINGS
4.1 Wincle Grange Farmhouse and the Barn south west of Wincle Grange were first listed by the Secretary of State in July 1952. On 14 April 1967 amendments were made to the list which included descriptions relating to these two buildings. The Barn west of Wincle Grange and the Barn south east of Wincle Grange were also added to the list. Wincle Grange Farmhouse was listed at Grade II\* and the three barns were listed at Grade II.
4.2 On 14 June 1984 the entire list for Wincle parish was amended. Updated entries for the four listed buildings, including new descriptions and notes, received approval from the Secretary of State. 5 PEAK DISTRICT NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY QUINQUENNIAL REVIEWS OF LISTED BUILDINGS
5.1 For more than 30 years the Authority has carried out regular inspections of all listed buildings within the National Park. The Authority’s records show that inspections were made of Wincle Grange on 13 July 1978, 6 September 1984, 30 September 1992, November 1999, and 5 October 2004. Observations were made on the survey forms and photographs were taken showing the external appearance of the buildings over this span of 35 years.
5.3 On none of these five occasions was contact made with the owners regarding the condition of the property or the identification of any unauthorised alterations.
5.4 It therefore came as a surprise to Mr and Mrs Malkin when in January 2013 a breach of listed building control was alleged to have taken place involving unauthorised alterations to the listed buildings going back over 30 years. This was particularly the case in view of the statement made in the Authority’s leaflet, Listed Building News 2011, featuring the quinquennial reviews, where it was stated that ‘unless an issue is identified you won’t be contacted again.’
6 THE LISTED BUILDING CONSENT APPLICATION
6.1 In early 2013 the Authority issued two Schedules of Unauthorised Works, one relating to the farmhouse, and the other to the farm building northwest of the farmhouse. In each document a list of alleged breaches were identified and, where appropriate, steps were set out for their regularisation.
6.2 Following discussions between the Authority and Mrs Malkin’s agent, the Schedules were amended, as confirmed in a document received from the Authority on 25 June 2014. This amended document has formed the basis of the current application for listed building consent which is fully detailed in the applications drawings and summarised in the accompanying Schedule of Rectifications Works. The application consists of a number of proposals related to the farmhouse and the farm building northwest of the farmhouse that will rectify breaches of consent, including replacement of windows to match those formerly existing, and replacement of all external guttering and pipework in cast iron, as well as regularising some alterations already carried out for which the Authority will consider granting retrospective approval.
6.3 There will remain some unauthorised works. The Authority has agreed that these can remain in situ until a future owner decides to submit a Listed Building Consent application for suitable replacements.
6.4 It is considered that the proposals will lead to a considerable enhancement to the heritage assets and satisfactorily remedy the breach of listed building control.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0625-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 4,
"total-input-tokens": 7541,
"total-output-tokens": 2029,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
243,
1
],
[
243,
3011,
2
],
[
3011,
5452,
3
],
[
5452,
8148,
4
]
]
} |
ce384f0f0e690a3a1d734043f3f577fa92951504 | | CODE No | NPDD0800 319 | P.FILE No. | 474 | |---------|--------------|------------|-----| | OS MAP No. | 2268 | GRID REF | 2205 6885 | | APPLICANT | The Board of Governors of Lady Manners Shutts Lane BAKEWELL Derbyshire | c/o AGENT | Peter Knowles Garden House Fountain Square Youlgrave BAKEWELL Derbyshire | | POSTCODE | DE45 1JA | POSTCODE | DE45 1UR | | Tel No. | | Tel No. | 01629 636362 | | APPL TYPE | Listed Building Consent | PROPOSAL | Erection of 2 dwellings and extension to Honeypot Cottage | | LOCATION | Walled Garden & Honeypot Cottage, Castle Hill | | PARISH | Bakewell | | ADVERTISEMENT DATE | 25 Aug 2000 | LAST ADVERT DATE | 15 Sep 2000 | | CONSTRAINTS | Adjacent to TPO. Within curtilage of listed buildings, Conservation Area | | CONSULTATIONS | Bakewell Town Council Derbyshire Dales District Council Derbyshire County Council (Highways) Built Environment | DATE SENT | 17 Aug 2000 17 Aug 2000 17 Aug 2000 17 Aug 2000 | | | | DATE REPLY | 17 Aug 2000 17 Aug 2000 17 Aug 2000 17 Aug 2000 | | COMMITTEE | Bakewell | | DECISION | Date | | APPEAL | Date lodged | | Decision | Date | ENFORCEMENT RECORD CARD
This card should be filed immediately in front of the decision notice which in turn should be in front of a set of approved plans.
The following amendments have been formally agreed by the planning officer since the issue of the decision notice:
| DATE | DETAILS | |------|---------| | | |
The following conditions have been formally complied with since the issue of the decision notice:
| DATE | COND.NO. | DETAILS | |------|----------|---------| | | | |
# Site Visit Record
| DATE | INSPECTION | PROGRESS | DEPARTURES | |------|------------|----------|------------| | | | | |
## Key Dates to Note
| DATE | DETAILS | |------|---------| | | |
## Key Factors to Watch
| DETAILS | |---------| | | To: The Board of Governors of Lady Manners\
c/o Peter Knowles\
Garden House\
Fountain Square\
Youlgrave\
Bakewell\
Derbyshire DE45 1UR
PLANNING (LISTED BUILDINGS & CONSERVATION AREAS) ACT 1990.\
PLANNING (LISTED BUILDINGS AND CONSERVATION AREAS) REGULATIONS 1990.
In pursuance of the powers vested in the Peak District National Park Authority under the above Acts and Regulations and with reference to your application for listed building consent, details of which are as follows:
Office Code No. NP/DDD/0800/319\
Date received: 15 August 2000\
Proposal: Erection of 2 dwellings and extension to Honeypot Cottage\
Location: Walled Garden and Honeypot Cottage, Castle Hill\
Parish: Bakewell
THE DECISION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT CONSENT FOR THE PROPOSED WORKS in the manner described on the application and shown on the accompanying plans and drawings is
REFUSED for the following reasons:
Honeypot Cottage and the garden wall are curtilage structures which are associated with the Boarding House, a Grade II listed building. If the site had to be developed then the proposals are acceptable. However these curtilage structures and their setting are better conserved through no development. As the primary duty of the National Park Authority is conservation and enhancement it is appropriate to refuse unnecessary, undesirable changes to the character of listed curtilage features. (GS1, C9 and LC6).
Relevant Structure Plan policies include GS1, C9. Relevant Local Plan (Provisional Adopted Version) policies include LC4, LC6.
Signed
Authorised Officer of the Authority
Date 5 JAN 2001
Attention is called to notes overleaf STATEMENT OF APPLICANT'S RIGHTS ARISING FROM THE REFUSAL OF LISTED BUILDING CONSENT OR FROM THE GRANT OF CONSENT SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS
1. If the applicant is aggrieved by the decision of the local planning authority to refuse listed building consent for the proposed works, or to grant consent subject to conditions he may appeal to the Secretary of State for the Environment in accordance with Section 20 (1) of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 within 6 months of the date of this notice. Appeals must be made on a form which is obtainable from the Department of the Environment, Tollgate House, Houlton Street, Bristol, BS2 9DJ. The Secretary of State has power to allow a longer period for the giving of a notice of appeal but he will not normally be prepared to exercise this power unless there are special circumstances which excuse the delay in giving notice of appeal.
2. If listed building consent is refused, or granted subject to conditions, whether by the local planning authority or by the Secretary of State for the Environment, and the owner of the land claims that the land has become incapable of reasonably beneficial use in its existing state and cannot be rendered capable of reasonably beneficial use by the carrying out of any works which have been or would be permitted, he may serve on the council of the district in which the land is situated a listed building purchase notice requiring that council to purchase his interest in the land in accordance with the provisions of Section 32 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
3. In certain circumstances, a claim may be made against the local planning authority for compensation, where permission is refused or granted subject to conditions by the Secretary of State on appeal or on a reference of the application to him. The circumstances in which such compensation is payable are set out in Section 28 of the Planning (Listed Building and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
Where consent is given by the planning authority to the demolition of a listed building, attention is drawn to Section 8 of the Act, the effect of which is that demolition may not be undertaken (despite the terms of the consent granted by the planning authority) until notice of the proposal has been given to the Royal Commission on Historical Monuments, Fortress House, 23 Savile Row, London W1X 2HE, and the Commission subsequently have either been given reasonable access to the building for at least one month following the grant of consent, or have stated that they have completed their record of the building or that they do not wish to record it. It was proposed and seconded that consideration of the item be deferred pending a site visit. This was put to the vote and fell.
An amendment for approval subject to conditions was proposed and seconded. This was put to the vote. Members were equally divided, the Chair using his casting vote, voted in favour and the amendment was carried.
The Assistant National Park Officer, Head of Planning informed the Committee that as the approval contravened policy it would have to be referred to Policy Committee.
RESOLVED:
That subject to the prior completion of a S106 legal agreement ensuring that funds from the sale of the site are spent on improvements to the boarders' accommodation, access and landscaping, the application be recommended to the Policy Committee for APPROVAL subject to conditions covering access, detailed design, landscaping and withdrawal of permitted development rights.
5. LISTED BUILDING CONSENT – ERECTION OF 2 DWELLINGS AND EXTENSION TO HONEYPOT COTTAGE, WALLED GARDEN & HONEYPOT COTTAGE, CASTLE HILL, BAKEWELL (NP/DDD/0800/319, P.474, 15.8.00, 2205 8885/BT)
It was proposed and seconded that the application be approved subject to conditions. This was put to the vote. Members were equally divided, the Chair using his casting vote, voted in favour and the amendment was carried.
The Assistant National Park Officer, Head of Planning informed the Committee that as the approval of the planning application contravened policy it would have to be referred to Policy Committee. If the planning application is approved then the application for Listed Building Consent can be approved.
RESOLVED:
That subject to the prior approval of the planning application NP/DDD/0800/328 the application be APPROVED subject to conditions covering detailed design and landscaping.
6. FULL APPLICATION – ERECTION OF INDUSTRIAL UNIT, UNIT 4, STATION ROAD INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, BAKEWELL (NP/DDD/0800/334, P.1911, 21.8.00, 2223 6905/BT)
The Assistant National Park Officer, Head of Planning requested that consideration of this item be deferred pending further consultation.
RESOLVED:
That consideration of this item be deferred pending further consultation.
The meeting adjourned at 12.50 pm for a half-hour break
The meeting reconvened at 1.20 pm.
Cllrs Mrs Bevan and Doughty did not attend the re-convened meeting.
7. FULL APPLICATION – ERECTION OF 8 FLATS ON SITE OF FORMER BLOCK B AND PROVISION OF BASEMENT LEVEL CAR PARK, CRESSBROOK MILL, CRESSBROOK, LITTON (NP/DDD/0900/364, P.10951, 12.9.00, 1730 7267/BT)
The Planning Officer reported that the District Council had no objections and that the Highway Authority had no objection in principle, but would submit more detailed responses in due course.
The Chair reported that an Authority Member wished to speak on this item. MINUTES
AGENDA ITEM No. 2
Meeting: Policy Committee Date: 10.00 am 22 December 2000 Venue: Aldern House, Baslow Road, Bakewell, Derbyshire Chair: Mr A Brown
Present: Mrs A Ashe, Clr J A Bull, Mr J T Bunting, Clr G M Doughty, Mr J C Fears, Clr Mrs H M Gaddum, Mr R Greatorex, Mr A D Hams, Mr K Jackson, Mr W W Kirkham, Clr Mrs E D M Lovatt, Mrs S Prince, Clr J M T Sutcliffe, Clr D B Taylor, Clr Mrs A Western.
Apologies for absence: Clr Mrs B Allonby, Clr T Bristowe, Clr Mrs G M Francis, Clr D Mole,
REPORT OF THE ASSISTANT NATIONAL PARK OFFICER – HEAD OF PLANNING
Clr J A Bull and Clr A Western declared a non-pecuniary interest in the next item and Mr R Greatorex declared a pecuniary interest. These Members withdrew from the meeting during consideration of the application.
88/00 FULL APPLICATION – ERECTION OF 2 DWELLINGS AND EXTENSION TO HONEYPOT COTTAGE, WALLED GARDEN AND HONEYPOT COTTAGE, CASTLE HILL, BAKEWELL (NP/DDD/0800/328, P.474, 21.8.00, 2205 6885/BT)
The Committee were requested to consider this application which had been recommended for approval by Planning Control Committee. The decision had to be made by the Policy Committee as approval would be a departure from agreed policies.
A supplementary report was tabled which commented in detail on a letter of objection from Mr W W Forrester and a letter of support from Clr J Youatt. The Committee were advised that the Department of the Environment had issued an Article 14 Direction which prevented the Authority issuing a planning consent. The article did not prevent consideration and refusal of the application.
Mr J Mills Chairman of the Governors of Lady Manners School (the applicants) addressed the meeting speaking in favour of the granting of the application. He explained that the development was necessary to provide finance for the repair and improvement of the Boarding House which was a listed building.
Mr W Forrester of Burre Close Bakewell addressed the meeting requesting the Committee to refuse the application. He cited the relevant policies stating that the application had no basis in planning.
Clr Mrs C Crowther addressed the meeting speaking in favour of granting the application emphasising the importance of the school and Boarding House in the community and the need to carry out repairs and improvements to retain its viability.
A motion to approve the application as recommended by the Planning Control Committee was moved and seconded. Clr Doughty requested a recorded vote on this motion. This was supported by 4 other Members in accordance with Standing Orders. On being put to the vote this motion was lost. The voting was recorded as follows:
| For the Motion | Against the Motion | |-------------------------|-----------------------------| | Mrs A Ashe | Mr A Brown | | Mr J T Bunting | Clr G M Doughty | | Mr J C Feams | Mr A D Hams | | Clr Mrs H M Gaddum | Mr K Jackson | | Mr W W Kirkham | Mrs S Prince | | Clr Mrs E D M Lovatt | Clr J M T Sutcliffe | | | Clr D B Taylor |
A motion to refused the application was moved and seconded.
RESOLVED
That the application be REFUSED on the following grounds:
1. Contrary to housing policy.
2. Undesirable changes to the character of listed curtilage features and the Bakewell Conservation Area.
OUTLINE APPLICATION – CONVERSION OF FORMER WATER TREATMENT WORKS TO FORM 19 APARTMENTS, THE LADYBOWER CENTRE, ASHOPTON ROAD, YORKSHIRE BRIDGE, BAMFORD NP/HPK/0800/119, P.6479, 248.00, 2016 8528/JRS
The Committee were requested to consider this application which had been recommended for approval by Planning Control Committee. The decision had to be made by the Policy Committee as approval would be a departure from agreed policies.
Mr A Etchells Agent for the applicants addressed the meeting speaking in favour of approval of the application.
RESOLVED
That the application be APPROVED subject to the conditions covering the following:
1. Submission of reserved matters, conversion to be within existing building, subject to omission of conservatory.
2. Withdrawal of permitted development rights.
3. Highway conditions.
4. Environment Agency conditions.
REPORT OF THE ASSISTANT NATIONAL PARK OFFICER – SECRETARY AND SOLICITOR
MEMBER TRAINING WORKING GROUP: APPOINTMENT OF MEMBER (A.1144/EWJ)
The Committee were requested to approve the appointment of Mr Hams to the National Park Authorities Member Training Working Group, with attendance at meetings as an approved duty.
RESOLVED:
That the appointment of Mr Hams to the National Park Authorities Member Training Working Group be approved, with attendance at meetings in 2001 being an approved duty for the purposes of the payment of attendance, travelling and subsistence allowances.
The Meeting finished at 10.50 am. MINUTES
Meeting: Planning Control Committee Date: 11.20 am, Friday, 24 November 2000 Venue: Aldern House, Baslow Road, Bakewell, Derbyshire Chair: Clr J A Bull
Present: Mr G R Adams, Clr Mrs J Bevan, Clr T Bristowe, Mr A Brown, Clr D W Cotterill, Mrs L Crowe, Clr Mrs C M N Crowther, Mrs A P Dale, Clr S M Doughty, Clr Mrs H M Gaddum, Mr R D Greatorex, Mr A Hams, Ms B Hilditch, Clr D Mole, Clr Mrs A Mone, Mrs S Prince, Clr J M T Sutcliffe, Clr Mrs A Western.
Apologies for Absence: Clr W Burrows, Mrs T Heathcote, Mrs K M Potter.
417/00 SPECIAL POLICY COMMITTEE
The Chair reported that the Special Policy Committee meeting arranged for 1 December 2000 would now be held on 22 December 2000 at 10.00 am.
418/00 MINUTES
The Minutes of the meeting held on 27 October 2000 were approved as a correct record subject to the following amendments:
MINUTE 379/00
5. LISTED BUILDING CONSENT – ERECTION OF 2 DWELLINGS AND EXTENSION TO HONEYPOT COTTAGE, WALLED GARDEN & HONEYPOT COTTAGE, CASTLE HILL, BAKEWELL (NP/DD/0800/319/P.474/15.8.00, 2205 6885/BT)
Clr J Bull declared a non-pecuniary interest in this item, withdrew from the meeting and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon. Mr Greatorex declared a pecuniary interest in this item, withdrew from the meeting and took no part in the discussion or voting thereon.
419/00 MATTERS ARISING ON THE MINUTES
MINUTE 258/00
15. UNAUTHORISED DEMOLITION OF THE CRESSBROOK MILL, CRESSBROOK (P.10951/BT)
The Planning Officer reported that a letter had been received from Calver Parish Council stating that they strongly supported the prosecution by the Authority.
The Solicitor then reported that the summons had been served and that a hearing would be held on 7 December 2000. She stated that the maximum fine the Court could impose was £20,000 plus six months' imprisonment if the case was determined by the magistrates. AGENDA ITEM No. 4.1
PEAK DISTRICT NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY
SPECIAL POLICY COMMITTEE
22 DECEMBER 2000
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT OF THE ASSISTANT NATIONAL PARK OFFICER – HEAD OF PLANNING
PART A
1. FULL APPLICATION – ERECTION OF 2 DWELLINGS AND EXTENSION TO HONEYPOT COTTAGE, WALLED GARDEN AND HONEYPOT COTTAGE, CASTLE HILL, BAKEWELL (NP/DDD/0800/328, P.474, 21.8.00, 2205 6885/BT)
1.1 Some Members have received a letter of objection, a variant of which has been sent to the Authority. There is also a letter of support which again challenges interpretation of adopted policies. In addition the objectors' solicitors have requested the Government Office (GOEM) to call in the application. In view of the short time scale GOEM has issued an Article 14 Direction which prevents the Authority issuing a planning consent should it be minded to do so. However, the Direction does not prevent the Committee making a resolution on the application.
Letters from W W Forrester, Coombs Hay, 16 Burre Close, Bakewell, DE4 1GD dated 15 and 18 December 2000
2.1 Mr Forrester lives adjacent to the application site and states that he is writing on behalf of 2 of his neighbours.
2.2 The earlier letter is a notification of his request to speak at Committee when 2 questions will be asked:
1. Why is the application being granted when it has been refused on 2 earlier occasions given that there are no changes in the nature of the proposals?
2. As the development will not conserve or enhance the valued characteristics of the area, why is consent being granted?
2.3 The subsequent letter amplifies the first point emphasising that the reason for approving the application is not a valid consideration. It is stated that an approval will be an unfortunate precedent and furthermore the Committee will be acting beyond its powers. Consideration would have to be given to reviewing the decision in the courts.
Comment
2.4 On the first question the 1998 proposal was for 6, modified to 4 dwellings. It was withdrawn in the knowledge of objections. The earlier applications in 2000 were very similar to the present proposal. The current proposal is a resubmission which has been revised to comply with amendments put forward during the course of the last applications (planning and listed building). It is submitted with substantial supporting information, including a draft planning obligation which obliges profits from any sales are directed to approved developments at the Boarding House. 2.5 The Planning Control Committee was evenly divided on the current planning application but recommended approval on the casting vote of the Chair, the majority of Members feeling that the wider planning benefits of an approval outweighed the disbenefits. It was considered that an exception could be made to adopted policies because of the valued service the Boarding House provides, and as part of the wider role in the school community.
2.6 On the second question, it is preferable to have no development as the curtilage buildings are better conserved. An unkempt garden next to an important open space is a more desirable landscape feature. Nevertheless it is considered that the curtilage buildings are of modest architectural interest. No significant harm would arise if the current proposal was considered to be necessary when balanced against other factors. The same argument applies to the loss of open space.
e-mail letter from Clr John Youatt, The Square House, Middleton-by-Youlgreave, jrv241@aol.com dated 20 December 2000
2.7 Clr Youatt states that the officer view is that the case is not made for approval under HC1 and that there are no policy grounds to override that conclusion. He disagrees on both counts and complains that the Authority's case is fully presented and the school is referred to selectively. He feels the school's case should be presented in full as in the case of an appeal.
2.8 He requests that the following statement is presented to Members, it is summarised below:
1. The conclusion that an approval would not set a precedent,
2. It is strongly believed that GS2 is more inclusive than the officer interpretation.
3. There is surprise at the little weight given to the community and employment policies.
4. It is believed that on balance the benefit is to the listed building.
"1.13 Human rights
It might be a breach of human rights if this statement on behalf of the applicants were shortened or selectively quoted, given that the main body of the advice written by the LPA runs to over 7 pages and has frequently referred selectively to our points.
1.1 Departure from policy
In our judgement on a balanced assessment of all policies, the proposal is within policy. It might be construed to be against one or more individual policies. In fact I assess that it is against one policy only, C9 (b), in that the development alters part of the curtilage of the listed building. Even here the benefits to the listed building itself should be taken into account, C9 (a)
1.4 Appendix
I assume that the bulk of the appendix is an historic record of the site specifics on which the competent committee has ruled and that the remainder is policy matter that is dealt with now in this report.
1.6 No selection of policies in isolation
Very welcome, thank you. 1.7 Valued characteristics
Thank you for addressing this vital subject. We reconfirm our firm belief that LMS and its boarding house, and the communities and people that these inseparable parts of the business provide for, are indeed valued characteristics of this local planning area.
1.8 Not within GS2
As you know, I most strongly disagree with your officers on this point. Speaking as a user of Bakewell and as a representative of users of Bakewell, I believe GS2 does provide for Bakewell and its various functional hinterlands as a matter of:
- Plain English – there is nothing in the grammar of this policy that conditions the first part of the policy to the second part.
- Reasoned justification – there is nothing in the supporting text to subjugate the first half, Bakewell's general function, to the second half, the main parts of the so called 'Bakewell Project'. The project, (small p), was for Bakewell and its catchment area. It was not a self-contained set of proposals in time or in place and is still incomplete. In my reading, SP paras 2.22 and 2.23 make this point.
- Policy development – early drafts of GS2 were written before the specific elements were designed.
- Political development – parties to the drafting of GS2 accepted it in the wider context.
- Simple common sense – if you have a market town that serves a wider area, there are bound to be a series of unpredicted developments relating to that function.
I believe GS2 should be considered to be a strong presumption in favour, to be set against C9(b).
1.9 Not within HC1 (c)
Contrary to the text in your report, the money will in part maintain and enhance the listed building, a valued characteristic, as well as its current function.
1.10 SC1 and E1 not substantial
We welcome your acceptance that these two policies support the development. We remain astonished that you consider them to be insubstantial in the face of the number of parents, children and employees that are dependant on the School as a business and as a community facility.
1.11 Contrary to HC1
I conclude that the proposal is within HC1 and that even if not, there are at least four other substantial policies in its favour.
1.12 Probably no precedent
We welcome your advice that a precedent would not be set, and wholly agree.
1.14 Conclusion and recommendation
We hope that the Committee will accept the sub-committee's recommendation". Comment
2.9 The planning application has a substantial amount of supporting information including a challenge to the officer interpretation of policies which led to the earlier refusal. The report addressed these issues and summarised supporting information in accordance with standard practice. Again the officer interpretation of the Authority's policies is challenged and again with the exception of the Human Rights issue, the response has been prepared in consultation with the Policy Service Manager.
2.10 Comments on the statement are given below.
Human Rights: Out of necessity all planning reports summarise the views of applicants, consultees and third parties. The aim is always to ensure that there is a fair application of policies relevant to the key planning issues rather than summarising and commenting in proportion to the volume of information.
1.1 Departure. The proposal is contrary to C9 (b) in that part of the listed curtilage wall will be covered by 2 dwellings but the benefits are to alter and extend the Boarding House to maintain its present use. The approved changes to the Boarding House are acceptable but they are not desirable conservation of the historic building fabric. Furthermore English Heritage has published guidelines for enabling developments to conserve historic buildings. They allow for enabling development to secure the long-term future of the heritage asset rather than just maintaining its continued use. This proposal falls outside of these guidelines. For reasons explained in paragraph 1.9, 1.10 and 1.11 of the committee report, HC1 does not apply. Approval of the application represents a departure from adopted policies.
1.4 No comment.
1.6 No comment.
1.7 Valued characteristics: It is inferred that the Boarding House is inseparable from the school. No evidence has been given to suggest that the school will not survive any closure of the Boarding House. The argument is to preserve the Boarding House for its own sake rather than deciding on its relevance to the National Park as is explicit in the policies. As the Boarding House largely serves areas outside the park, its relevance as a valued characteristic within GS1 is open to question.
1.8 Policy GS2 essentially supports the principle of accepting developments that are related to Bakewell as part of its service function. Exceptional developments which support the town's service role could be accepted (eg funding the relocation of the livestock market through open market housing). However, the Boarding House is not related in its function to Bakewell or its service area. Instead, it serves a greater area largely beyond the school/Bakewell catchment area. There is no evidence that retention of the Boarding House is critical to the local economy (like the livestock market). Therefore GS2 does not apply here.
1.9 HC1 (c). The benefits of the sale of the building plots are divided between the County Council and to the school. The school requires an estimated £190,000 for the approved work at the boarding House. The estimated return on the sale of Honeypot Cottage and the building plots is £290,000-£385,000, ie £145,000 - £192,500 to the school. Therefore little if anything will be left for building maintenance. This argument does not support an exception under policy HC1(c). 1.10 No further comment (see p6 of PCC report).
1.11 The conclusion is not justified.
Conclusion
3.1 There is a policy basis for refusing the application and that is stated in the Planning Control Committee report (Appendix 2). The objector's original grounds for concern are summarised in Appendix 1 and addressed in that report. The subsequent objection fails to appreciate that exceptions can be made to policies if there are good planning reasons to do so.
3.2 There is no policy basis for approving the current proposal that is why an approval would be a departure from the Development Plan. However, it is unlikely to create a precedent because of the specific circumstances of the case. Consequently, it is not felt that the departure would be of more than local significance. If the Committee wish to approve the application it should be as an exception to policies. The grounds for approval would be because the development would enable the school to continue with a service which benefits the wider community and also has some benefits to the school and town. The Committee could resolve to approve the application but an approval notice could only be issued if the Article 14 notice was either withdrawn, or GOEM advised that it had no wish to call in the application.
Human Rights
3.3 Any human rights issues have been considered and addressed in this supplementary report.
List of Background Papers (not previously published)
English Heritage Policy Statement. Enabling Development and the Conservation of Heritage Assets 1999. If Members are minded to make an exception to policy in this case then consideration needs to be given to the precedent it may create and in practical terms there needs to be a legal agreement ensuring that funds raised from the sale of the site are spent on improvements to boarders accommodation and site access and parking. Any consent would also need to include conditions covering access, detailed design, landscaping and the withdrawal of permitted development rights.
**Human Rights**
Any human rights issues have been considered and addressed in this report.
**RECOMMENDATION:**
That the application be REFUSED on the following grounds:
1. Contrary to housing policy.
2. Undesirable changes to the character of listed curtilage features and the Bakewell Conservation Area.
**List of Background Papers** (not previously published)
Nil
5. **LISTED BUILDING CONSENT – ERECTION OF 2 DWELLINGS AND EXTENSION TO HONEYPOT COTTAGE, WALLED GARDEN & HONEYPOT COTTAGE, CASTLE HILL, BAKEWELL (NP/DDD/0800/319, P.474, 15.8.00, 2205 6885/BT)**
This is the Listed Building Consent application for the development described in the previous item.
**Consultations**
Highway Authority – no objection in principle.
District Council – no objections subject to entry into a legal agreement which identifies a schedule of works required to the Boarding House and implementation of the works before occupation of the final house and to ensure all monies raised from the sale is used on works at the Boarding House.
Town Council – approve.
**Representations**
Two letters have been received from 3 local residents. Objections are on the following grounds:
1. The development spoils the character of the Honeypot Cottage and the Conservation Area.
2. Acceptance of this development on a protected environment will create a precedent for other developments.
3. Unsuitable road and site access.
4. Disturbance during the construction period.
5. Speculatory selling of assets to benefit the school but at the disadvantage of local residents and a protected environment. Main Policies
Relevant Structure Plan policies include: GS1, C3, C9, HC1, SC2, E1.
Relevant Local Plan (Provisional Adopted Version) policies include: LC4, LC5, LC6, LC7, LC17, LS4, LB1, LB2.
Human Rights
Any human rights issues have been considered and addressed in this report.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the application be REFUSED on the following grounds:
1. Undesirable changes to the character of listed curtilage features.
List of Background Papers (not previously published)
Nil PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
SCHEDULE OF SPEAKERS
MEETING: SPECIAL POLICY MEETING
DATE: 22 December 2000
| DATE LETTER RECEIVED | SPEAKERS NAME | AGENDA ITEM No | |----------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------| | 12/12/00 | Mr J Mills, Chair, Lady Manners School Governors (NB Checked with Agent, Chair is speaking instead of the Head 20/12/00) | 4.1 Page 1 | | 15/12/00 | Mr W Forrester, Objector | 4.1. Page 1 | | 15/12/00 | Clr Mrs Crowther | 4.1. Page 1 | | 20/12/00 | Mr A Etchells, Agent | 4.2 Page 10 | The National Park Officer, Peak District National Park Authority, Aldern House, Bakewell, Derbys.
ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT
Dear Sir
POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING FRIDAY 22 DECEMBER 2000 CASTLE HILL BOARDING HOUSE
Please note that the Chairman of the Governors at Lady Manners School, Mr. J. Mills, wishes to address the Committee briefly.
Yours faithfully,
Peter Knowles BA ARIBA
Copy to Client 15th December 2000
The Assistant National Park Officer, Secretary and Solicitor Peak District National Park Authority Aldern House Baslow Road Bakewell Derbyshire DE45 1AE
Dear Sirs
I understand that a Planning Control Committee meeting is scheduled for Friday 22nd December at 10.30 am. I further understand that the Committee will be considering the planning application for the proposed erection of two dwellings and garages and extension to Honeypot Cottage at Castle Hill, Bakewell – Office Code Number NP/DDD.1299/581 and Office Code Number NP/DDD/1299/582.
I wish to make a short presentation to the meeting and understand I will be allowed three minutes for this purpose. I am hereby giving notice in writing, as requested.
During my three minutes, I will ask the following questions:-
1. Why is the application being granted when it has already been refused on two occasions, given that there are no fundamental changes to the nature of the proposals?
2. Given that this development will not conserve nor enhance the characteristics of the areas, why is consent now being granted?
Yours faithfully
W W Forrester Mr J Anfield\
Assistant National Park Officer - Head of Planning\
Peak District National Park Authority\
Aldern House\
Baslow Road\
Bakewell\
DE45 1AE
Dear Mr Anfield
2 Dwellings and alterations to Honey Pot Cottage, Burre Close, Castle Hill, Bakewell\
NP/DDD/0800/319 and 328
Thank you for your letter of 13th November 2000.
I confirm that I will be attending on 1st December 2000 to address the meeting and trust that you will take this as the requisite 48 hours notice.
Yours sincerely
Mary Sellers\
Headteacher 15th December 2000
The Assistant National Park Officer, Secretary and Solicitor Peak District National Park Authority Aldern House Baslow Road Bakewell Derbyshire DE45 1AE
Dear Sirs
I understand that a Planning Control Committee meeting is scheduled for Friday 22nd December at 10.30 am. I further understand that the Committee will be considering the planning application for the proposed erection of two dwellings and garages and extension to Honeypot Cottage at Castle Hill, Bakewell – Office Code Number NP/DDD/1299/581 and Office Code Number NP/DDD/1299/582.
I wish to make a short presentation to the meeting and understand I will be allowed three minutes for this purpose. I am hereby giving notice in writing, as requested.
During my three minutes, I will ask the following questions:-
1. Why is the application being granted when it has already been refused on two occasions, given that there are no fundamental changes to the nature of the proposals?
2. Given that this development will not conserve nor enhance the characteristics of the areas, why is consent now being granted?
Yours faithfully
W W Forrester To: Adrian Brown For attention of: Fax number: Total number of pages (including this one):
Your reference: Our reference: From: Date:
PLEASE TELEPHONE AT ONCE IN CASE OF INCOMPLETE RECEIPT
Castle Hill - Policy Committee
1. I enclose copies of the 2 letters for the Director.
2. GOEM have made an Article 14 direction preventing the PDNPA from issuing an approved notice until further notice - i.e. until they have had time to consider the request for a call-in.
Member of the Association of National Park Authorities Holder of Council of Europe Diploma
National Park Officer: Christopher Harrison Assistant National Park Officers: Conservation: Ken Parker Planning: John Anfield Recreation: John Thompson Secretary & Solicitor: Kevin Francis Chief Finance Officer: Peter Swaby 18 December 2000
Dear Councillor Gaddum
Special Policy Committee Meeting 22 December 2000 Honeypot Cottage, Castle Hill, Bakewell
I understand that the Committee of which you are a member is to consider a full planning application for the erection of two dwellings and an extension to Honeypot Cottage, Castle Hill, Bakewell on 22 December. I live immediately adjacent to the proposed development site at 16 Burre Close, and am also writing on behalf of my neighbours, Mrs Hills and Mrs Primmer who also reside at Burre Close.
I am writing to urge you to vote against the proposal and the reasons for this are as follows:
i) From the Officers report to the Planning Control Committee on 27 October 2000 it is quite clear that there are no planning arguments in favour of this proposal. Any consent would be a departure from the development plan notwithstanding the planning authority’s duty to have regard to that plan under section 54A of the Town and Country Planning Act.
ii) It would appear that members of the Planning Control Committee resolved to grant the application on the basis not of any valid planning argument, but purely because of the “service” which Lady Manners’ Boarding School is said to provide to the area. This is not in our view a valid planning consideration at all.
In the circumstances I must request that the committee turns down the application. Otherwise, an unfortunate precedent will be created and furthermore it appears to me that the committee will be acting beyond its powers. If the application is approved, I and my neighbours will have to consider an application to have the decision reviewed by the Courts.
Yours sincerely
W W Forrester Dear Mr Knowles
Proposed developments in the grounds of Lady Manners School Annex NP/DDD/0800/319 and 328
I refer to your letter of 25 September. It was not practical to report your application to the September meeting of the Planning Control Committee because reports have to be prepared at least 10 days in advance and it was held on 20 September, less than a month after your application had been registered. As for when officers work on an application, this is an internal matter but please bear in mind staff did take leave during this period and we have no choice in some of our priorities such as deadlines for appeal statements.
Please note that the earlier refused application was referred to my colleagues in our Policy Service Team to establish whether or not it represented a departure from the Development Plan. Then it was considered to represent a departure. In the light of your interpretation of the Authority's policies, I have requested further appraisal. My colleagues' comments will be incorporated into the Committee report.
I apologise for not contacting you earlier but as you are aware we do endeavour to return all calls within 24 hours and generally succeed.
Finally, in respect of the possible appeal, it is your judgement whether or not to proceed. Members are very conscientious and I do not expect this matter to effect the outcome of current applications.
Yours sincerely,
B Thompson Senior Planner Development Control 13th September 2000
APPLICATION NO. 1. NP/DDD/0800/328/C & 2. NP/DDD/0800/319/LC
Peak District National Park Authority, Aldern House, Baslow Road Bakewell, Derbyshire, DE45 1AE
Dear Sirs,
1. ERECTION OF TWO DWELLINGS AND EXTENSION TO HONEYPOT COTTAGE, WALLED GARDEN AND HONEYPOT COTTAGE, CASTLE HILL, BAKEWELL FOR LADY MANNERS BOARD OF GOVERNORS
2. ALTERATIONS TO LISTED BUILDING - ERECTION OF TWO DWELLINGS AND GARAGES AND EXTENSION TO HONEYPOT COTTAGE, WALLED GARDEN AND HONEYPOT COTTAGE, CASTLE HILL, BAKEWELL
I refer to the above applications which were considered at a meeting of the Northern Planning Sub-Committee, held on 12th September 2000, when it was resolved that the District Council raises no objections to both applications subject to a legal requirement being prepared to identify a schedule of works required at the boarding house and the implementation of all such works before occupation of the final house and to ensure all monies raised from the sale of the two dwellings be used on the works at the boarding house.
Yours faithfully,
A. R. YARWOOD Head Of Planning Services 11th September 2000
Peak Park Planning Department Aldern House Baslow Road Bakewell Derbyshire DE45 1AE
For the attention of Mr John Davies – Head of Development Control
Dear Sirs
Planning Applications Ref Nos: [NPDDDO 800319 and NPDDDO 800328]
With regard to the above application submitted by Lady Manors School, I am writing once again to register my strong objection to the proposed development. My reasons for objection are as noted previously, and are:-
1 Conservation Area
The area in question is within the designated Bakewell conservation area. I believe it is important and right that the Peak District National Park Authority maintain and conserve the characteristics of the area. When purchasing property in the area, decisions are made secure in the knowledge that the characteristic and nature of the area will be protected and investment is made accordingly. I believe the proposed development would destroy the designation of the area but, more importantly, it would create precedent for development elsewhere which would be difficult to refuse.
2 Honeypot Cottage
Honeypot Cottage and the garden wall are curtilage structures and are prominent in the area. Any change would surely be deemed to be inappropriate.
3 Line of Site
The proposed development would alter the nature of the view to the detriment of myself and other householders within the vicinity. 4 **Access**
Access to the proposed development is likely to be dangerous and inadequate for both traffic and pedestrians.
5 **Construction Period**
There will be major disruption during the construction period and the quiet environment would be destroyed.
6 **Traffic Increase**
Burre Close is a quiet cul-de-sac with relatively little traffic. However, the configuration of the roadway is dangerous with a blind hill and corner - any increase in traffic can only lead to danger for all concerned.
7 **Reason for Development**
It is understood that the proceeds from any development would be used to upgrade the Boarding House. As I have said previously, I believe such funds should be raised by means other than the destruction of the local environment. It will also be setting a dangerous precedent and the reasons and motives for any development should not influence the final decision. Such decisions should surely be based upon the affect on the local environment and on the lives of the people living in the surrounding area.
For all the reasons outlined above in supporting the preservation of the tradition and the nature of the area, I oppose the application.
I would also point out that this is the third application for such development in the last 1½ years. The residents in the surrounding area are well aware that planning authority can very often be gained by continually applying for the same development. Surely, it should be made clear to the proposed developers that the volume of applications should have no effect on the basis upon which developments are considered.
Yours sincerely
W W Forrester Advert Placed in the Derbyshire Times W/C 20 Aug 2000
FaO: Natalie | TO: | BT | FILE: | P474 | |-----------|----------|-------|------| | FROM: | PAS | DATE: | 21-8-00 | | | | | | | PROPERTY: | Honey St Col. | | | | PARISH: | Bakewell | | | | PROPOSAL: | New Homes | | | | APP No: | 0500/319 | | |
SUMMARY OF ADVICE:
If design is as previous scheme, I have no objections. Notice of Planning Proposal
AN APPLICATION HAS BEEN MADE
by The Board of Governors of Lady Manners School
for Erection of 2 dwellings and extension to Honeypot Cottage
at Walled Garden & Honeypot Cottage, Castle Hill, Bakewell
This site lies within the curtilage of Grade II Listed Buildings and within Bakewell Conservation Area
Ref. No. NPDDD0800319 Date 25/08/2000
A copy of the application and plans may be inspected during office hours for the next 21 days following the date of this notice at the National Park Authority Office.
A copy has also been sent to the District / Borough Council and Parish Council / Meeting for comment. If you wish to make any comments please write to the National Park Authority Office within that time. Please note that the Authority now permits members of the public and consultees to address its committees, including those which determine planning applications. Please contact this office if you require details.
National Park Officer, Peak District National Park Authority, Aldern House, Baslow Road, BAKEWELL, Derbyshire, DE45 1AE
Tel. Bakewell 816200 The National Park Officer, Peak District National Park Authority, Aldern House, Bakewell, Derbys.
Dear Sir,
2 PROPOSED NEW HOUSES AND GARAGES AND ALTERATIONS TO HONEY POT COTTAGE
BURRE CLOSE, CASTLE HILL, BAKEWELL.
On behalf of Lady Manners School, I am re-submitting a Listed Building Application for this project. The proposed scheme is as previously submitted and as subsequently revised to comply with the requirements of Derbyshire Dales District Council, County Highways, and yourself.
However, the supporting evidence is more extensive this time. It is set out in the enclosed letter from the Chairman of the Governors of Lady Manners School and the various appendices which accompany his letter. Appendix B (Section 106 undertaking) will be sent to you in the near future.
The archaeological survey of the site, commissioned by Lady Manners School, was submitted in the course of the previous application and showed nothing of significance on the application site.
I should be pleased to deal with any queries arising.
A list of submitted drawings is enclosed.
Yours faithfully,
Peter Knowles BA ARIBA
Copy to Client 2 PROPOSED HOUSES AND GARAGES AND ALTERATIONS TO HONEY POT COTTAGE
BURRE CLOSE, CASTLE HILL, BAKEWELL
DRAWINGS SUBMITTED WITH THIS LISTED BUILDING APPLICATION
3 COPIES OF -
| | Location Plan | Site Plan | Site sections | Site sections | Roof Plan | Floor Plans Plots 1 & 2 | Elevations | Elevations | Elevations | |---|---------------|-----------|---------------|---------------|-----------|--------------------------|------------|------------|------------| | 532/02A | Site Plan | Existing | 1/1250 scale | | 04A | Site sections | Existing | 1/200 | | 07C | Site sections | Proposed and Existing | 1/200 | | 18A | Roof Plan | Proposed | 1/200 | | 20 | Floor Plans Plots 1 & 2 | Proposed | 1/100 | | 21A | Elevations | Proposed | 1/100 | | 22A | Elevations | Proposed | 1/100 | | 23A | Elevations | Proposed | 1/100 |
HONEY POT COTTAGE
| | Floor Plans | Existing | 1/100 | |---|-------------|----------|-------| | 532/14 | Floor Plans | Existing | 1/100 | | 15 | Elevations | Existing | 1/100 | | 16B | Floor Plans | Proposed | 1/100 | | 17B | Elevations | Proposed | 1/100 |
Perspective view from south within grounds of Castle Hill Boarding House A4
Note to Planning Officer
If any of the drawings are to be displayed to the Committee may I suggest the following selection as a minimum:
| | Roof Plan | Section through site | Elevations | perspective view | |---|-----------|----------------------|------------|------------------| | 532/18A | Roof Plan | Section through site | Elevations | perspective view |
1/200 scale model available on request for Committee meetings approximate size 400 x 400 x 100mm (Please contact the Architect) 8th August 2000
Chairman of Planning Committee, Peak National Park Authority, Aldern House, Bakewell.
Dear Sir,
Planning Application, Castle Hill, Bakewell.
This letter is written on behalf of the Governors of Lady Manners School in support of a resubmission of our application for planning permission for the development of the disused kitchen garden at Castle Hill Boarding House. The application seeks permission for the building of two dwellings and alterations to Honeypot Cottage which adjoins the garden. The underlying reason for this application is to generate a source of capital for alterations to the listed building at Castle Hill, thereby securing the future of the buildings and the Lady Manners School state boarding facility which is housed there.
It seems to us that the Peak Park Authority refused permission for our previous application on policy rather than grounds specific to the Castle Hill site. Throughout the preliminary negotiations with your officers, we were dealing satisfactorily with site-specific issues on the assumption that the proposal was ultimately approvable. Thus we were surprised at the last minute reversal of that assumption and the change to a situation where it was necessary to establish grounds for an exception to policies.
We have taken advice on this point and conclude that our proposal is indeed within the policies of the National Park Authority if, as is stressed in paragraph 1.18 of the Structure Plan, a judgement is made on the balance of all relevant policies.
An analysis is enclosed of the grounds for refusal and the relevant policy issues, based on the advice we have been given. (Appendix 1)
As indicated above, the purpose of the development for which approval is sought is solely to generate funds to permit alterations which will enable the preservation, repair and enhancement of the listed building on this site as follows:-
1. Alterations to the existing vehicular access from Baslow Road. At present this has very poor sight lines such that it constitutes a severe hazard for traffic on Baslow Road and for vehicles exiting from the Boarding House. Alterations to the entrance have already been approved by the Peak Park Authority.
2. Alteration to and extension of former stable block, currently a garage, fuel store and boiler house, to provide additional sleeping accommodation for staff. These plans have already been approved by the Authority.
3. To permit necessary repairs to and restoration of the listed building and the separate boys' accommodation block which lies within the curtilage of the listed building.
- A report by quantity surveyors Darwent Shaw shows the cost of the changes to the entrance and of the alterations to the stable block to increase accommodation for boarders to be of the order of £190,000. There are other uncosted repairs and restorations to be carried out if funds permit. There is a presumption that Derbyshire County Council will require that up to 50% of the sale of any asset of a former County maintained school should be returned to the County. Thus the estimated proceeds of the sale of the land and cottage to which this application relates should be at least double the QS estimates. The Quantity Surveyors’ report and an estimated valuation of the cottage and garden with planning permission is enclosed. Appendix 2.
- To ensure a safe vehicular access and maintain the financial viability of the boarding facility at Castle Hill, alterations are necessary. The School has pursued all other sources of funding and found none other than the sale of building land. These points are elaborated in Appendix 3, which includes a statement by the school’s accountant.
- State Boarding is a valuable educational and social resource which is endorsed and supported by the current government – albeit not financially! Whilst there are 36 State Boarding Schools in England and Wales, Lady Manners School offers the only such facility within 50 miles of Bakewell. Appendix 4
- The Boarding House at Castle Hill provides valuable local employment, facilities for adult education, additional accommodation for the main school, a social and educational service which benefits many living in and around the Peak Park and which is of great benefit to Lady Manners School as a whole. Appendix 5.
- The socio-educational benefits for a relatively small number of youngsters must be added to the wider benefits for all pupils at Lady Manners School. Individual case studies are particularly poignant and illustrate clearly that State Boarding is certainly not elitist. These points are elaborated in information provided by the headteacher, Mary Sellers. Appendix 6 & Appendix 7.
- A legal undertaking by the School under section 106 of the act is enclosed, committing the use of the net proceeds of the sale of the property currently under consideration for the sole purpose of maintaining and enhancing the listed building and its environs. Appendix 8. The School Governors request that members of the Planning Committee should give most serious consideration to this application, as refusal will most certainly jeopardise the future of the state boarding facility at Castle Hill and lead to its ultimate closure. This will result in the loss of an amenity for the local community, loss of local employment, loss of a valuable resource and social asset for the school and loss of a valuable social asset for the wider community. We consider that, as custodians of the listed building at Castle Hill, we merit your support.
Sincerely
John Mills - Chairman of Governors, Lady Manners School. Points of relevance to this application are included in a series of appendices listed below:
Appendix 1 relates to planning policy issues
Appendix 2 shows quantity surveyor’s costings for items 1 & 2 above.
Appendix 3 is a brief outline of the financial status of the Boarding House, prepared by the School’s accountant.
Appendix 4 is a brief history of the origins of the Boarding House and its current function.
Appendix 5 lists the direct benefits that accrue to Bakewell and the Peak Park due to the Boarding House.
Appendix 6 is information from Mary Sellers, the headteacher of Lady Manners School indicating the educational and social benefits which the Boarding House confers upon both the boarders at Castle Hill and the 1500 members of the Lady Manners school population as a whole.
Appendix 7 contains case histories of several pupils at Castle Hill Boarding House. This information is sensitive and confidential, thus the details have been rendered anonymous.
Appendix 8 is a legal commitment to dedicate the net proceeds of the sale of any property to which this application relates solely to the conservation and enhancement of the listed building and its environs. Castle Hill APPENDIX 1.
Comments on the Refusal Notice dated 5/4/2000
A. Analysis of the reasons for refusal
Reason 1.
Firstly, GS2 is not limited to the Bakewell project nor to Bakewell itself. The first half of the policy is general to Bakewell as the main service town for the wider area such as the livestock market, shopping, services or school catchment areas. The second half, which is specific to some elements of the project, is additional to the first part. The proposal, as an integral part of the school and as a community facility, is therefore within GS2.
Secondly, HCI (c) does apply here. The development will enhance an area of derelict former garden and walls and, under the financial obligation that has been offered under section 106 of the Act, will enhance the main listed building and its settings and enable remedial works to the inappropriate 1960’s building. The proposal complies with HC1(c).
Thirdly, the approval is not ‘an exception to policies’ if the NPA had had regard to paragraph 1.18 of the Plan, which requires that all relevant policies be taken into account. As a matter of fact, not all of them were taken into account. As matter of judgement, we believe that had they been, it would have been appropriate to decide that the proposal is not a departure from policies. See section B, below.
Fourthly, it is surprising to see a claim that this will set a precedent for similar developments. The very next item on the same agenda allowed the demolition of a building of character in a conservation area on the grounds that the applicant couldn’t afford a conversion. At Calver Mill, new houses were approved to enable the Mill’s setting to be conserved – similar to the argument we are applying here. (And allegedly with no rigorous financial test - the capital generated in that case greatly exceeding the need, which should have been the test, which the school is applying most rigorously to its proposal). At Bakewell, open-market houses were allowed on the riverside to assist the funding of the livestock market and other social elements of the project.
Reason 2.
Firstly, this reason is self-contradictory. The development cannot be both ‘acceptable’ and ‘undesirable’.
Secondly, if the case on reason 1 above is correct, it is not ‘unnecessary’. It is for the NPA to say how the listed site would be saved if not by this route, so that the alternative route can be assessed by the NPA against the school’s proposal and other policy delivery. (See SC2 below.)
Thirdly, it is wrong or at least very sad if the presumption is that no development can of itself enhance the Park. Indeed, we think the NPA does look in other documents for good examples of modern design. We think this design will enhance the Park in its own right, thus fulfilling the first sentence of policy GS1, which was written for this type of positive change.
B. Policies not given sufficient weight
Having dealt with the grounds for refusal the NPA should check whether the decision, which was based primarily on the officer’s report, gave adequate weight to other policies that support approval. It seems to us that it didn’t. The following policies (and there may be others - we haven’t exhaustively checked the development plan) should be taken more explicitly into account:-
(i) Development of community services. - SC2(a). The proposal clearly includes the maintenance, continuation and enhancement of community services.
and SC2(b). It is not clear what would happen if the school use were to fall. We do not know of and the NPA has not said – if they thought about it at all – whether there is an alternative community user that would comply with and be able to afford to comply with SC2(b). If there isn’t, the commercial successor to the school use would result in an enforced departure from this policy that might well cause the NPA’s policies more harm than the harm that it alleges in the current decision would be caused by the approval of the school proposal.
(ii) Economic Development – jobs - E1. If the school use fell, there is no guarantee that the next user would be an employer “of a scale and type that is clearly intended to meet local needs”. This was a controversial and crucial policy that, we are told, the NPA successfully defended and is not to be treated lightly.
(iii) Conservation of listed buildings in appropriate uses – C9. This is a complex and sophisticated policy that allows for if not encourages the school’s use of and duty of care for the main listed building, which is the very purpose of the school’s proposal. We believe the proposal delivers the first part of this policy, C9(a). The second part allows within policy, not as an exception to policy, for beneficial change on listed buildings and sites. There is only one type of change that is specifically discouraged. Thus the school’s proposal is within this policy.
Conclusion
The School suggests that the ‘credibility of the policies’ is not at risk by approval of this proposal. The NPA’s credibility would be at risk, if the proposal were not assessed as above. We believe that the proposal is not only approvable within policy but should be approved on application of all the relevant policies. They are overwhelmingly in favour of this excellent example of the conservation and enhancement of a site and buildings and will keep them in community use. Costings Darwent Shaw Partnership, Chartered Quantity Surveyors, prepared Cost Plan 2 in December 1998, as follows:
Work to the Boarding House Work to the driveway etc.
£ 94,000 £ 34,000
£ 128,000
Updating to Dec. 2000 VAT Furniture & fittings, professional fees.
+9% = £ 140,000 +17.5% = £ 165,000 +15% = £ 190,000
The Proposed Development
An estimated guide price for the sale of Honeypot Cottage and the land with Planning and Listed Building Approvals is £ 290,000 to £ 385,000
(subject to infrastructure costs, planning conditions, legal considerations etc. This is not a valuation.)
or for Honeypot Cottage and the land without Planning approval is £ 100,000
Guide-price by Stephen Fanshawe FRICS (Chartered Surveyor) of Eadon Lockwood Riddle Residential CASTLE HILL - FUNDING OF PROPOSED CAPITAL WORKS
1. P Knowles has talked to the Peak Park in terms of £190,000 for the new access and accommodation adaptations.
2. Proceeds from the sale of developable land are required to finance this cost.
3. Funding is otherwise not available:
- the current balance on the Boarding House account is only £60,000 which is the minimum considered necessary as either:
- a contingency/working balance
- a fund to meet closing down costs
- for a number of years, the Boarding House has just about broken even at around the current level of 38/40.
- the current level of fees is as much as the market will stand, and there is, therefore, no scope to generate additional income by increasing fees.
- the School does not have statutory authority to use LMS grant to fund expenditure at the Boarding House.
- the Foundation cannot legally be used for Boarding House purposes.
- the chances of a successful capital grant bid (structural challenge or seed challenge) are extremely remote.
- the School is not empowered to borrow.
- consultants have advised that the circumstances at the Boarding House are not appropriate for a PFI scheme.
T P Hadfield 28.06.00 Financial Considerations
- For safety reasons, an improved access from Baslow Road is essential.
- To maintain financial viability, increased accommodation is required for the Boarding House. (This is partly to replace accommodation lost in addressing the additional requirements of the recent Children’s Act.)
- The demand for boarding places at Castle Hill varies from year to year. There may be excess demand for girls’ places, with surplus places for boys or vice-versa. Thus maintaining full capacity each year is not easy.
- Most of the costs are fixed and the break-even figure (38-40 boarders) is currently not far below full occupancy (44 boarders). Thus there is little scope for accumulating surpluses in “good” years to offset deficits in “bad” years. Additional accommodation would permit an increase in the safety margin above break-even.
- Without additional accommodation, the Boarding House faces imminent closure, as the current level of reserves is only sufficient to meet the costs of a phased closing down period. (Immediate closure would be detrimental to those boarders currently present). There would be additional follow-on redundancy costs.
- There is no funding for improvements or running costs that we have been able to identify as being available from central sources or the LEA or any other trust or foundation. The possibility of a Private Finance Initiative for these capital projects has been investigated by consultants Clarson-Goff who found it to be unsuitable.
Included below is a report from the School Accountant, showing the situation regarding possible sources of funding the alterations.
- ENC TPHadfield doc Costings Darwent Shaw Partnership, Chartered Quantity Surveyors, prepared Cost Plan 2 in December 1998, as follows:
* Work to the Boarding House: £94,000
* Work to the driveway etc.: £34,000
Total: £128,000
Updating to Dec. 2000:
- +9% = £140,000
- VAT +17.5% = £165,000
- Furniture & fittings, professional fees, +15% = £190,000
The Proposed Development
An estimated guide price for the sale of Honeypot Cottage and the land with Planning and Listed Building Approvals is £290,000 to £385,000
(subject to infrastructure costs, planning conditions, legal considerations etc. This is not a valuation.)
or for Honeypot Cottage and the land without Planning approval is £100,000
Guide-price by Stephen Fanshawe FRICS (Chartered Surveyor) of Eadon Lockwood Riddle Residential Planning Application for Castle Hill – Appendix 4
Lady Manners School and the Boarding House
Lady Manners School is a non-selective state comprehensive school, having Foundation School status, operating within the ambit of Derbyshire L.E.A.
The school is the sole provider of state secondary education for Bakewell and district.
Castle Hill Boarding House is a financially self-supporting adjunct to Lady Manners School, accommodating an average around 40 boarders of both sexes between 11 and 18 years of age.
Boarders are normally British nationals with relatives in the UK, with the exception of some European pupils on English language placements. Almost all have family (frequently grandparents) within 40 miles of Bakewell.
History
Lady Manners School, as a rural school, has a history of boarding going back into the 18th century.
The listed building at Castle Hill was acquired by DCC Education department in the 1950s as part of a National strategy to provide a state boarding facility for pupils whose home social circumstances were such that boarding was a necessary or desirable option. The addition of a separate boys’ block in the early sixties made it possible to accept girl boarders. At this time, many of the boarders were sponsored by the LEA on social grounds. Most others were children of forces personnel stationed abroad.
Current Role of the Boarding House
Changes in social policy on childcare in recent years have resulted in relatively few boarders coming via the Social Services route. Reduction in the number of overseas bases has greatly reduced the intake from families of Forces personnel.
Current intake is typically from three sources:
a) Children from families whose parents are stationed overseas by virtue of their employment. b) Children whose home circumstances are unstable for a variety of reasons eg. due to marital breakdown. c) Orphans sponsored by the School’s Campbell-Blair fund.
Castle Hill is emphatically not an elitist establishment. Boarders receive a free state education. Fees are charged only for the boarding and supervision.
Admission criteria are based on need, not ability. A significant number of boarders have statements of special educational need or require learning support. Potential boarders are carefully vetted to avoid the possibility of admission to Castle Hill being used to circumvent the School’s normal admission policy.
Many families need access to boarding education, for a variety of reasons, but cannot afford the cost of public school fees. Formerly there were many state boarding schools. Castle Hill is now the only such institution left in Derbyshire. The nearest alternative state boarding facilities are in mid-Lincolnshire, North Yorkshire, North Wales and Loughborough.
Case histories in Appendix 7 illustrate the social and educational role of Castle Hill Boarding House. "There are still serious problems of accommodation for teaching. There has been substantial improvement and remodelling of the science teaching area and a new library and resources building since the previous inspection, and the plans then proposed have been completed. Accommodation for special educational needs is much improved since the last inspection and the learning support centre is a lively and pleasant learning environment. There have been new music practice rooms, a careers area, a remodelled food technology room and further provision for information technology. Further plans for increased classroom space, and improved sixth form area and sports facilities are under consideration by the governing body and the school's management. There remain, however, major problems of overcrowding and poor accommodation in some areas, for example, in arrangements for information and communications technology, art and textiles. The indoor facilities for physical education are poor, especially when there is bad weather or the space is used for other purposes; and this contrasts with the excellent playing field facilities. Most subjects are affected by the limitations in accommodation and by the difficulty in identifying subject bases as centres for teaching and resources."
"Boarding Provision"
256 The Castle Hill Boarding House is a happy, cohesive and well-run community. It is producing self-confident and civilised young people. The excellent atmosphere and ethos originate from a great deal of hard work skilfully executed by a thoughtful and committed boarding staff.
262 Taken overall the provision for boarding at Lady Manners School is one where pupils receive pastoral care of a very high standard which promotes the development of well rounded and thoughtful individuals ready to go out into the world both to live good quality lives of their own and enabled to enrich those of others."
257 All the staff offer effective support and advice. The pupils universally feel that there is a good choice of sympathetic trustworthy people who are always ready to advise and help. Academic progress is carefully watched by the four teachers who work in conjunction with their colleagues tutoring at the main school. The setting and completion of homework are closely checked. Homework time for younger pupils is supervised and structured by teaching staff: more senior pupils are progressively encouraged to work in their own areas. The pupils have access to the expertise of the teacher supervising, a small but effective reference library and word processing facilities.
258 Personal development of pupils is seen as an important area. They are encouraged to take increasing responsibility for organising their own lives as they mature. Sixth form pupils not only organise their work but also may have interesting weekend jobs, drive cars responsibly and belong to local organisations such as amateur dramatics. All members of the House are encouraged to be both critical and tolerant. Input is welcomed in the planning of activities, such as those that occur at weekends. These activities provide a very wide range of interesting opportunities extending from horse riding and go-karting to long walks and shopping in towns. There is a firm and fair code of behaviour, which is accepted by the pupils and consistently applied. The staff are always happy to explain and discuss with pupils why they can or cannot do things. The buildings are set in spacious grounds allowing pupils to relax and to practise ball games. Externally both buildings are in need of repairs to their renderings and some of the windows in the boys' block need their woodwork replacing. Internally the rooms are of a good size and mostly light and airy. They never house more than four pupils and most are twos or threes. Some rooms would benefit from redecoration, but pupils are allowed to personalise their own areas with posters. Furnishings are appropriate and well maintained, although some stairways and corridors would benefit from more pictures. Staff and pupils usually ensure that the rooms, which are checked and cleaned daily, are kept neat but not slavishly tidy. The washing and toilet facilities for both sexes are adequate. Common rooms include a TV/video room for girls, one for boys and one for both sexes. There is a large games room which provides facilities for pool and table tennis, a music practice room and a computer room with E-Mail facilities. The library contains a small, but useful, collection of reference books and some entertainment videos; however, there are rather few novels and works of fiction. Everything is kept scrupulously clean by the domestic staff and any kind of graffiti or vandalism is extremely rare.
Effective measures are taken to promote the health, safety and general well being of the pupils. Food is hygienically stored and carefully prepared to present an attractive balanced diet with a volume suitable for teenagers. Laundry is very regular and the pupils' clothes look fresh and clean. There are well-organised and controlled first aid arrangements with qualified staff. Medical and dental visits are well catered for and all is carefully recorded. There are regular fire practices and testing for the alarms and emergency lighting. All electrical equipment, both public and private, is regularly examined by an electrician. All adults, who have significant contact with boarders, are checked in accordance with appropriate regulations. Staff are trained in and aware of child protection procedures and counselling; the pupils also have well advertised access to an independent listener. There are four pupil telephones, but the privacy of these is wholly inadequate. At least two staff are always on duty day and night and there are proper procedures for tracking the whereabouts of pupils when they are away from Castle Hill. Appropriate measures encourage both mixing and separation of the sexes. There are good relationships with the social services, who have been invited in to inspect.
Since the last inspection by OFSTED, the good practices and provision for boarding have been further extended. More opportunities for pupils to organise themselves and to develop independently have been provided, such as an increased input into the planning of events and the running of the House. Every encouragement is given to plan free time activities, to join in with local groups and to make use of local facilities. Attention has been focussed onto the provision of a carefully graded increase in responsibilities for their own affairs as they move up the school. There are now ten computers available; pupils each have an E-mail address and CD ROM facilities are planned for the near future. The reference section of the library has been upgraded and expanded. Whilst the telephones still lack privacy there are now four of them. Planning Application for Castle Hill – Appendix 5.
Benefits to Bakewell and the Local Community.
1. Employment
The Boarding House employs 3 full time and 16 part-time staff, including educational, care work and domestic staff (details below)
2. Community use
The Boarding House provides facilities during the day for a variety of adult education and training activities. This includes provision of IT facilities where appropriate. (details below). On completion of the improvements to access and parking, the Boarding House could be more actively promoted for community use.
3. School use
Lady Manners School makes use of facilities at Castle Hill routinely to provide additional accommodation to supplement the overcrowded buildings on the main school site. (details below)
4. Social benefits
Castle Hill Boarding House provides a valuable service for families which, for a variety of reasons, need access to a state boarding facility in this part of the country. No other such facility exists within a 50 mile radius of Bakewell. Whilst not specific to Bakewell or even the Peak Park, it is a necessary social service for benefit of the wider community of the region. (Appendix 4 and Appendix 7 expand and illustrate this point)
5. Educational benefits
For many boarders who have had an unsettled and disrupted early life, Castle Hill and Lady Manners School together offer a stable social environment combined with the opportunity to achieve their full educational potential.
The boarders, several of whom are of mixed race origin, introduce a welcome element of ethnic, racial and cultural diversity into the predominantly rural English school population at Lady Manners School.
The presence, from time to time, of French and German pupil boarders is also of benefit to the whole school population.
(The statement in Appendix 6 from the headteacher, Miss Sellers, expands the social and educational benefits for both boarders and other pupils).
ENC. J Duckham, Head of Boarding doc. Castle Hill Boarding House
Employment of staff
1 Head of Boarding 2 Full-time Care Workers 4 Part-time Care Workers 3 Academic tutors 3 Part-time Cooks 3 Part-time Cleaner 1 Part-time Kitchen Assistant 1 Part-time Laundress 1 Part-time Caretaker
Community Use
- E.D.I.T (I.T training agency for the disabled and for women in rural communities) 4 full-days - Monday to Thursday.
- Life drawing class (self programming) Friday afternoons.
- Yoga Class (Adult Ed) Thursday Morning.
- Art Class (Landscape) Wednesday Morning.
- University of the 3rd Age (self programming) Tuesday Mornings - monthly.
- Four new Adult Ed classes for September 2000
- Training courses for national agencies
School Use
- School appeals
- G.C.S.E language orals (mock and actual)
- “A” level language orals (mock and actual)
- Staff development training
- Departmental meetings
- Learning support training
Boarders supported by Social Services
B - Complicated family history but chose to board rather than be fostered. H - receives help with fees due to family circumstances K - has boarded since she was 10 (attending a local primary school until she could go to Lady Manners). Receives help with fees from Social Services as her parents have autistic twin boys to support and Castle Hill was seen as a stable environment that would allow to flourish. Now at University studying.
Boarders supported by the Campbell - Blair Trust (Assistance for children after the death of one or both parents.)
P - Death of mother J - Death of mother A - Death of mother B - Death of mother
Percentage of Boarders receiving Learning Support 18% CASE STUDIES
Demonstrating the precise educational benefits for each case is next to impossible - you would need to measure attainment at entry and subsequently show that the difference was due to boarding and not a hundred and one other factors. The educational value for these youngsters is consistently that of getting - perhaps for the first time:
- a consistent home life - healthy food, clean and ironed clothing, leisure, outings, fun, a bit of a laugh.
- consistent discipline which enables them to structure their lives - the idea that events have causes and effects is often missing!
- planning ahead - being in an environment where other youngsters and the adults around have high expectations for their future.
- support in doing homework - a warm, quiet room to work in, support from a caring adult, a set time to start and finish.
All this may sound obvious, but I know that for at least five of the youngsters, these things have only all happened at the same time and consistently at Castle Hill.
The educational benefit is probably easiest to demonstrate in respect of students coming to the end of their school careers, so I have added a couple of sentences to some of the case studies to make this impact more explicit (Appendix 7).
WIDER BENEFITS
The wider socio-educational benefits are around these factors:
- many students at Lady Manners School lead a rural existence. Boarders are typically more worldly wise and even in small numbers, can inject wider experience.
- of the very few children in Lady Manners School from ethnic minorities, most have been students at Castle Hill. Even in a small way, this does broaden the ethnic mix and supports multicultural education in the curriculum.
- boarding assists the school in its monitoring and evaluation. Since the school is in itself 'in loco parentis' with regard to homework etc, we are aware of work set for students and the total impact of the school experience.
- Lady Manners School is very overcrowded. (See Appendix 4 Ofsted para 85). The Boarding House is used for storage, overflow classes, meetings, oral examinations etc. If this were not available, governors might have to consider reducing the numbers on roll.
STATE BOARDING
Attached are two forewords by DfEE Ministers in support of state boarding.
- There are now only about 35 state boarding schools in the country as opposed to 70 before 1993. The reduction in supply to match the reduction in demand has taken place and the remaining schools are needed. The STABIS map - we are school 6 - shows the region we serve. Regions do matter, not just in order to pick up local social cases such as those Jon has listed but, because families, particularly those with no previous experience of boarding want to board their children near where there are other family members to support in case of emergency. The Peak Park is convenient for many Northern conurbations as we well know. You may be able to make a case for attracting visitors in this way ….
- Boarding is more effective than residential care and a more realistic option than fostering or adoption for teenagers in the care of the local authority (or 'looked after children' - see Child A).
- Boarding is still needed by MoD-employees and expatriates. State boarding is very cost effective as compared to private boarding.
- STABIS research indicates that boarding houses below 35 are not viable. 45-50 is marginal in their view. Our break even figure thus tallies with their national view.
- They also comment on the social mix (see above).
- STABIS confirms that there is no external support for capital expenditure for state boarding other than the income from fees or the sale of assets. Welcome to the Parents' Guide to Maintained Boarding Schools. If you are reading this booklet for the first time, it is possible that you will not have heard of maintained or, as they are sometimes called, state boarding schools. It is a common myth that boarding is not available in the maintained sector. I am pleased to say that it is. Because the maintained sector only charge boarding fees, tuition is free. It is an attractive and affordable option.
I hope this Guide will help you to find a school which is right for your child. Modern boarding has a great deal to offer. Teams of dedicated boarding house staff provide welfare and pastoral support. They are committed to making a home-from-home environment which is also safe, secure and comfortable for the boarders in their care.
You will, of course, only get a real feel for the school(s) that interest you by visiting them in person. Please do not hesitate to contact them to arrange a visit. I am confident that you will be warmly welcomed.
Estelle Morris MP, Minister for School Standards About maintained boarding schools
What are maintained boarding schools? They are maintained (not independent) schools which take boarders as well as day pupils. Some schools are all-ability comprehensive schools, others are grammar. Some are single sex, others are mixed. All pupils follow the National Curriculum and take the same examinations as they would at a local school. Education at the schools is free. Parents only pay for the boarding. There are also details of two further education colleges in this guide.
What are the advantages of boarding at a maintained school? Parents choose maintained boarding schools because
- modern boarding is a flexible option - many schools offer weekly as well as termly boarding
- they have plenty of home comforts and offer a warm welcome
- they help children to become more confident and independent
- boarders have the best of both worlds - a ready made circle of friends in their boarding house and the chance to mix with local children
- of their academic reputation
- they provide continuity, for example for children whose parents' work involves frequent changes of location or where parents work long hours
- they offer a wide range of evening and weekend activities
- it is affordable. You pay fees for the boarding, but the education is free. CHILD A Child A came to us initially as a short term placement to allow his foster carers to take a holiday. He enjoyed it so much he asked his social worker if he could return as a permanent boarder but staying at his foster parents during school holidays and occasional weekends. He has a complicated background and family history. His mother walked out of the family home and left Child A and his two brothers with his step father. Eventually Child A and his two brothers were placed in care at various locations throughout Derbyshire. He still has regular contact with his father. His older brother died last year of a drugs overdose and his younger brother attends a special school due to behavioural problems. Despite this troubled beginning Child A has developed into a lively, friendly and helpful young man who has chosen to stay at Castle Hill next year whilst attending High Peak College. He has gained a place on a catering course and is extremely focused on becoming a chef. He will be the first to take advantage of our new policy of allowing 16+ students to follow vocational courses at local colleges of FE but still remain at Castle Hill as a boarder. Staff remarked on the change in Child A as soon as he went into boarding. The statistics for 'looked after' children in terms of progression and attainment make sorry reading and Child A was at risk of falling into his pattern. The stability and atmosphere at Castle Hill, where he is amongst children of his own age with high expectations and in the care of experience professionals has made all the difference. We now expect him to go on to make a success of his chosen career.
CHILD B Before Castle Hill, Child B had spent much of his life helping his mother to look after his elderly father who is suffering from Alzheimer's disease. Child B's mother works permanent nights in an old peoples' home so he did most things for his father. After his father stopped recognising both Child B and his mum (on one occasion he attempted to throw them both out of the house as he thought they were burglars) he was transferred to special accommodation. Child B then came to Castle Hill as a Year 7 boarder as mum could no longer leave him at home and go to work. Throughout his first year with us we have had to build up his confidence and self esteem and begin to develop his personal and social skills. There were already problems before he arrived which meant we had to deal with a number of issues - notably around personal hygiene (he would soil himself at regular intervals although we now appear to have stopped this) and the distress he suffers through not being allowed contact with his father.
CHILDREN C AND D The brothers came to Castle Hill after their mother died suddenly and their step father left them and went to work abroad. Their immediate family picked up the pieces and worked hard to sort out their lives. They had also been involved in a gang fight in their home city of Manchester and were facing court appearances. The family thought it vital they were removed from this environment and given a period of stability and exposure to more positive role models. Despite initial fears by their family that they may attempt to run back to Manchester they settled in quickly and began to take an active role in school life. Both the boys have represented the school at rugby and athletics and managed to avoid any custodial sentence as punishment for their misdemeanours. Child C, the elder brother, now wishes to return to Lady Manners for Sixth Form and Child D continues to make good progress. On admission, neither boy expected to take his education further than compulsory schooling. Child C will stay with us next year, even if he does not make the grade for Sixth Form and we will support him through Further Education. Child D, who will have been with us for two years when he completes Year 11, has every chance of going on to A levels. Their family are convinced that the professional care at Castle Hill has made that difference. CHILD J Child J's family were living in Germany where Mr J was a helicopter pilot in the army. Mrs J then developed MS and with Child J's brother's autism she found it increasingly difficult to cope with two demanding children. Child J then came to Castle Hill where despite initial problems associated with living away from home he settled in well. Child J also receives help from special needs where he continues to make progress.
FURTHER NOTE Out of total boarding population of 38 there are 8 boarders who receive help from Learning Support. This represents 21% of the boarding population. CERTIFICATE TO ACCOMPANY APPLICATION FOR LISTED BUILDING/CONSERVATION AREA CONSENT
Town and Country Planning Act 1990. Certificate under Section 10 of Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990.
A I certify that:-
on the day 21 days before the date of the accompanying application/appeal\* nobody, except the applicant/appellant\*, was the owner (a) of any part of the land to which the application/appeal\* relates.
Signed \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Date 11/8/00
\*On behalf of \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
or B I certify that:-
I have/ The applicant has given the requisite notice to everyone else who, on the day 21 days before the date of the application/appeal\*, was the owner (a) of any part of the land to which the application/appeal\* relates, as listed below.
| Owner's name | Address at which notice was served | Date on which notice was served | |--------------|-----------------------------------|--------------------------------| | | | |
Signed \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Date \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\*On behalf of \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
or C I certify that:
I/ The applicant/ The appellant\* cannot issue a Certificate A or B in respect of the accompanying application/appeal\*.
I have/ The applicant has/ The appellant has\* given the requisite notice to the persons specified below, being persons who on the day 21 days before the date of the application/ appeal\*, were owners (a) of any part of the land to which the application/ appeal relates
| Owner's (a) Name | Address at which notice was served | |------------------|-----------------------------------| | | |
Date on which notice was served 15 AUG 2000
ALLOTTED GROUP OFFICER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT REPLY P/L ALLOCATION
Continued over I have/ The applicant has/ The appellant has\* taken all reasonable steps open to me/him/her\* to find out the names and addresses of the other owners (a) of the land, or part of it, but have/ has not been able to do so. These steps were as follows:-
(b) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
______________________________________________________________________
Notice of the application/ appeal\*, as attached to this Certificate, has been published
in the (c) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ on (d) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Signed \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Date \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\*On behalf of \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
or D I certify that:-
I/The applicant/The appellant\* cannot issue a Certificate A in respect of the accompanying application/appeal\*.
I/The applicant/The appellant\* have/has\* taken all reasonable steps open to me/him/her\* to find out the names and addresses of everyone else who, on the day 21 days before the date of the application/appeal\*, was the owner (a) of any part of the land to which the application/appeal\* relates, but have/has\* been unable to do so. These steps were as follows:-
(b) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
______________________________________________________________________
Notice of the application/appeal\*, as attached to this certificate, has been published in the
(c) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ on (d) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
Signed \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Date \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
\*On behalf of \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
- Delete as appropriate
(a) 'owner' means a person having a freehold interest or a leasehold interest the unexpired of which is not less than 7 years, or, in the case of development consisting of the winning and working of minerals, a person entitled to an interest in a mineral in the land (other than oil, gas, coal, gold or silver). (b) description of steps taken (c) name of newspaper circulating in the area where the land is situated (d) date of publication (which must not be earlier than the day 21 days before the date of the application or appeal) PEAK DISTRICT NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY APPLICATION FOR LISTED BUILDING CONSENT TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING (LISTED BUILDINGS AND CONSERVATION AREAS) ACT 1990
Before completing this form, you are advised to read the notes overleaf. Three copies of this form, one completed copy of the pink Section 10 Certificate and three copies of all plans as specified should be submitted.
1 (a) APPLICANT Name: THE BOARD OF GOVERNORS OF LADY MANNERS SCHOOL Address: SHOTTS LANE, BAKEWELL Postcode: DE45 1JA Telephone No.: ..........................................................
1 (b) AGENT (if any) Name: Peter Knowles Architect Address: YOULGRAVE, near Bakewell Derbyshire DE45 1UR Tel. & fax: 01629 636362
2. Address and/or location of building. WALLED GARDEN & HONEYHOT COTTAGE CASTLE HILL, BAKEWELL
3. Particulars of applicant's interest in the land (eg, owner, lessee, prospective purchaser, etc) OWNER
4. Describe the proposed works. CONSTRUCTION OF 2 DWELLINGS IN WALLED GARDEN, EXTENSION OF HONEYHOT COTTAGE
5. Are any alterations to be made to the exterior of the existing building(s)? If yes, state clearly what these alterations are and indicate them clearly on the plans. SINGLE-STOREY GARAGE, LOUNGE, PORCH
6. If the proposal involves external alterations or extensions to a Listed Building: What materials and colours are as existing and as proposed: (If more than one material, this should be stated) (i) External walls (ii) Roof covering (iii) Rainwater goods and external plumbing (iv) Doors and windows
NATURAL STONE BLUE SLATES METAL TIMBER
PEAK DISTRICT NATIONAL PARK AUTHORITY 15 AUG 2000 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT REPLY FILE ALLOCATION: Confidential 7. Are any alterations to be made to the interior of the existing building(s)? If yes, state clearly what these alterations are and indicate them clearly on the plans.
MINOR ALTERATIONS (SEE PLAN)
8. Does the proposal involve any form of demolition? If yes, state the reasons for demolition and indicate the building(s) clearly on the plans.
DEMOLITION OF REDBRICK LEAN TO SHED
9. Where demolition is involved, has any planning application(s) been submitted in respect of redevelopment of the site. If yes, state when and quote the application code number(s) (if known).
Signed: [Signature] Name in Block Capitals: [Name] On behalf of: [Organization] Date: [Date]
NOTES FOR LISTED BUILDING APPLICATIONS
Applications should be made to the Peak District National Park Authority for consent to demolish, extend or alter the outside or inside of any "listed building", i.e. a building of special architectural or historic interest included on a statutory list issued by the Secretary of State. It is an offence to alter, extend or demolish a listed building without the consent of the Authority or the Secretary of State for the Environment. The Authority must advertise the application and determine it or refer it to the Secretary of State within 2 months, or within such a period as may be agreed in writing between the applicant and the Authority (except where the applicant has already given notice of appeal to the Secretary of State).
All applications to demolish listed buildings or to alter or extend Grade I and Grade II\* listed buildings have to be referred to national amenity bodies and any recommendation by the Authority to grant consent has to be confirmed by the Secretary of State.
Applicants should complete all parts of the form, as appropriate, and forward the following documents to the Peak District National Park Authority, Development Control Group, Aldern House, Baslow Road, Bakewell, Derbyshire, DE45 1AE.
All applications should contain: 3 copies of this form together with the completed certificate (usually A or B).
All applications to alter/erect buildings should contain 3 copies of scale drawings showing the following:
1. Existing plans and elevations drawn to scale of 1:50 or 1:100.
2. Proposed plans and elevations drawn to 1:50 or 1:100.
3. 1:500 block plan of site as existing and proposed showing site levels, if appropriate.
4. Site plan to scale of not less than 1:2,500 with the application site marked in red and any other land in the applicant's ownership/control marked in blue. view from south within grounds of Castle Hill Boarding House. Honeypot Cottage on the left
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0627-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 62,
"total-input-tokens": 133751,
"total-output-tokens": 24403,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1103,
1
],
[
1103,
1623,
2
],
[
1623,
1924,
3
],
[
1924,
3574,
4
],
[
3574,
6234,
5
],
[
6234,
9034,
6
],
[
9034,
11615,
7
],
[
11615,
13972,
8
],
[
13972,
15855,
9
],
[
15855,
18336,
10
],
[
18336,
21141,
11
],
[
21141,
23551,
12
],
[
23551,
26870,
13
],
[
26870,
28419,
14
],
[
28419,
30484,
15
],
[
30484,
30974,
16
],
[
30974,
30974,
17
],
[
30974,
31849,
18
],
[
31849,
32247,
19
],
[
32247,
33377,
20
],
[
33377,
33906,
21
],
[
33906,
35036,
22
],
[
35036,
35827,
23
],
[
35827,
37513,
24
],
[
37513,
38971,
25
],
[
38971,
40075,
26
],
[
40075,
41464,
27
],
[
41464,
43094,
28
],
[
43094,
43162,
29
],
[
43162,
43572,
30
],
[
43572,
44675,
31
],
[
44675,
44675,
32
],
[
44675,
44675,
33
],
[
44675,
45811,
34
],
[
45811,
47468,
35
],
[
47468,
49901,
36
],
[
49901,
52442,
37
],
[
52442,
53081,
38
],
[
53081,
54269,
39
],
[
54269,
56963,
40
],
[
56963,
59657,
41
],
[
59657,
60428,
42
],
[
60428,
61653,
43
],
[
61653,
63313,
44
],
[
63313,
64093,
45
],
[
64093,
66967,
46
],
[
66967,
70412,
47
],
[
70412,
73856,
48
],
[
73856,
75858,
49
],
[
75858,
77475,
50
],
[
77475,
79982,
51
],
[
79982,
81173,
52
],
[
81173,
82229,
53
],
[
82229,
83530,
54
],
[
83530,
87555,
55
],
[
87555,
88150,
56
],
[
88150,
90018,
57
],
[
90018,
92164,
58
],
[
92164,
93823,
59
],
[
93823,
96357,
60
],
[
96357,
96357,
61
],
[
96357,
96447,
62
]
]
} |
32ecb21e8400e34a7099f325befd2ec89575f618 | Dear Joanne,
Many thanks for the update and we look forward to receiving the revisions. Please can you send amended drawing(s) to Denise Hunt.
Kind regards, Rebecca Waddington
Conservation Officer, Cultural Heritage Team, Peak District National Park Authority Tel: 01629-816238
______________________________________________________________________
From: Jo Polmear [mailto:Jo@hunterpatelcreativegroup.com] Sent: 18 May 2015 11:58 To: Waddington Rebecca Subject: RE: LBC NP/DDD/0415/0368 Castle Inn, Bridge Street, Bakewell
Hi Rebecca Thanks for the information. I will look at amending the elevation and get it over to you for comment later today.
Regards Joanne Polmear jo@hunterpatelcreativegroup.com www.hunterpatelcreativegroup.com 01543 258 600 07801 023 679
Bridge House - Station Road ♦ Lichfield ♦ Staffordshire - WS13 6HX
______________________________________________________________________
From: Waddington Rebecca [mailto:Rebecca.Waddington@peakdistrict.gov.uk] Sent: 13 May 2015 17:25 To: Jo Polmear Cc: Hunt Denise Subject: RE: LBC NP/DDD/0415/0368 Castle Inn, Bridge Street, Bakewell
Dear Joanne,
I refer to this afternoon’s telephone discussion regarding the current listed building consent application for alterations to the Castle Inn, Bakewell.
I have read through the current listed building consent application NP/DDD/0415/0368 and my initial comments are as follows. I note that the proposed alterations are confined only to the outbuilding attached to the Castle Inn. It was very useful to have a pre-application site meeting to establish which parts of the structure are historic and whether any features survive, e.g. flagstone flooring. Are pre- application discussion is reflected in the current proposed scheme. I have no objection in principle to the works proposed to the first floor of the outbuilding or enlarging the linen store beneath the stairs at ground floor level. I note that one of the central ground floor spaces is being retained for storage. I have no objection in principle to converting two of the ground floor store rooms to bedrooms. The retention of the stone floor coverings in these rooms and making good any shortfall with flagstones to match the existing is welcomed. Your proposal to use lime plaster on the wall is also welcomed. I have attached a list of lime suppliers should you wish to discuss this plaster type or need to source it. The proposed paint finish for the external joinery is also welcomed.
The only concerns I have regarding the current scheme are:
1. Too much glazing is proposed for the replacement of the cart entry/vehicular doors. I have therefore attached an alternative scheme, based around your initial design. Apologies for the rough sketch. Please note, I have happy to discuss designs. The Authority will require a details of the proposed replacement for the doors, at an appropriate scale.
2. Are any extractor vents proposed for the new bathrooms? If so, information on the proposed location, design, dimensions and finish should be provided to that we can fully assess the impact of the proposed works on the significance of the listed building. One minor request, please could you confirm if any works are proposed to the lintels about the cart/vehicular entrances e.g. timber facings/ repainting.
Please note, the above advice is an officer’s opinion only and not binding on any decision the Authority makes on a planning or listed building consent application.
Finally, thank you for raising the issue with the advertisements on the Castle Inn. I believe an application has been submitted for the adverts. I hope the above and attached are of assistance. As mentioned, I should be in the office most of next week, except Wednesday, should you wish to discuss the above. In the meantime, I hope you have a good weekend.
Kind regards, Rebecca
Rebecca Waddington, Conservation Officer Cultural Heritage Team, Peak District National Park Authority Tel: 01629-816238
Peak District National Park Authority, Aldern House, Baslow Road, Bakewell, DE45 1AE t:01629 816200 www.peakdistrict.gov.uk Twitter: @peakdistrict The Peak District: where beauty, vitality and discovery meet at the heart of the nation.
This email is confidential, may be legally privileged and/or contain personal views that are not the Authority’s. It is intended for the addressee. If received in error please notify us and delete immediately. Under Data Protection and Freedom of Information legislation contents may be disclosed and the Authority reserves the right to monitor sent and received emails.
This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Claranet. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.claranet.co.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0628-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 3,
"total-input-tokens": 5515,
"total-output-tokens": 1230,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1553,
1
],
[
1553,
4346,
2
],
[
4346,
4675,
3
]
]
} |
92a074eabe9a42e17a7ec843797b0890c3a2915a | ### Lesson sequence
| Overall enquiry question | 3 Doors into 33,000 Voyages | |--------------------------|-----------------------------| | | Can you negotiate 33,000 sources to prove your theory? | | | Enabling pupils to test hypotheses using the Slavevoyages Database |
| Learning objectives | To deepen existing knowledge of the Triangular Trade | |---------------------|-----------------------------------------------------| | | To generate hypotheses from historical sources | | | To test these hypotheses against a statistical database |
| Year group | KS5 (England) | |------------|---------------|
| Lessons | 3+ Hours | |---------|----------|
| Resources | File name | Description of resource | |-----------|-----------|-------------------------| | | The Map and the Database Microsoft Power Point | Lesson material for use as a stand-alone lesson or the first lesson in a unit of work in which pupils go on to access the slavevoyages database. Includes teacher notes and tips for using the resource | | | Using the Slavevoyages Database Microsoft Word | Worksheet to accompany an internet based lesson, exploring the slavevoyages database. Includes pupil notes for using the database | | | Presentation Template Microsoft Power Point | Pupil presentation tool to accompany an internet based lesson, exploring the slavevoyages database |
| Author | Katie Hunter | |--------|--------------| Lesson one
| Lesson enquiry question | What does this map tell us about Britain’s role in the Slave Trade? | |-------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------| | Learning objectives | To ascertain facts and inferences from, and question the value of, a National Archive primary document. | | Resources | The Map and the Database ppt Multiple print-outs of the map source (Optional) |
| Time | Activity | Resources | Differentiation | Technology | |------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------|-----------------------------| | 5 min| Visuals of the Triangle Trade/African Trade for re-cap/discussion purposes | PowerPoint ‘The Map & the Database’ Slides 1&6 | | Whiteboard/project | | 5 min| Prompt class Discussion: What is odd about this map? | PowerPoint ‘The Map & the Database’ Slides 8 | Print-out of Map with ‘Fill-in the blanks’ writing spaces | | | 10 min| Give each group a print out of the map source to analyse | Map Source Print-outs | True/False decisions | PowerPoint ‘The Map & the Database’ Slide 11 | | | Question: What does this source tell us about Britain’s role in the Slave Trade | PowerPoint ‘The Map & the Database’ Slides 10 | | | | 10 min| ~Share findings/Mark~ | PowerPoint ‘The Map & the Database’ Slides 12&13 | Scaffolded Questions | PowerPoint ‘The Map & the Database’ Slide 15 | | | Question: What does this source suggest to us about the Slave Trade | PowerPoint ‘The Map & the Database’ Slides 14&15 | | | | 10 min| Answer the question individually ‘Is this document useful to a historian trying to find out about the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade?’ | PowerPoint ‘The Map & the Database’ Slides 16-24 | | | | 5 min| ~Share findings/Mark~ | Use a Mark scheme for the ‘How useful’ type of question that fits into your KS5 syllabus | | | | 10 min| Introduction to the idea of the slavevoyages database and how they will, next lesson, verify the source using the database. | PowerPoint ‘The Map & the Database’ Slides 16-24 | | |
### Lesson two
| Lesson enquiry question | Does the database back up the hypotheses we made from the inferences we drew from the map? | |-------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Learning objectives | To generate hypotheses from historical sources\
To test these hypotheses against a statistical database\
To present findings that compare and contrast the information contained in primary documents and the database. | | Resources | Using the *Slavevoyages* Database Worksheet/Instruction Sheet\
Presentation Template ppt\
Internet access, Presentation tools (e.g. Microsoft Office’s PowerPoint) |
| Time | Activity | Resources | Differentiation | Technology | |------|----------|-----------|-----------------|------------| | 5 min| Re-cap | PowerPoint ‘The Map & the Database’ Slides 16-24 | Pupils may follow the step by step instructions to check the example hypotheses\
In order to familiarise themselves with the database before moving on to individualised enquiries | Compu Suite | | | Use the inferences drawn from the map in Lesson 1 to create hypotheses.\
E.g The map tells us that the British owned most of the factories on the West Coast CHANGES TO Did the British own most of the factories on the West Coast? | | | | 25 min| Individuals, pairs or groups follow instructions to interrogate the database, create graph and answer the worksheet questions | Database Instruction Guide “Using the Slavevoyages Database” | Accompanying task sheet/instruction sheet | Compu Suite | | | Distribute other sources relating to the slave trade such as the Barbadian letter document/British Port Statistics to follow a new line of enquiry – all groups should check their line of enquiry with the teacher before proceeding | | K Hunter – I have sourced and pupil tested 2 further sources to extend the unit of work if required.\
See The Letter and the Statistics PREVIEW ppt | | | 25 min| Pupils copy and paste the results of their own enquiries into presentations and annotate | PowerPoint ‘Presentation Template’ | | Compu Suite | | | Extension Task: Pupils can develop their own hypotheses and follow their own lines of enquiry in the same vein | PowerPoint ‘Presentation Template’ Teachers could add guide headings to annotation boxes | | | Lesson three
| Lesson enquiry question | What can the database tell us about the logistics of the Slave Trade? | |-------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | Learning objectives | To present a PowerPoint that compares and contrasts the primary document and the database information. | | Resources | White Board access, Presentation tools (e.g. Microsoft Office’s PowerPoint), primary source document print-outs |
| Time | Activity | Differentiation | Technology | Resources | |-------|-----------------------------------------------|-----------------|---------------------|----------------------------| | 45 min| Pupils deliver presentation | | Whiteboard and projector | Pupils’ presentation PPts | | 45 min| Pupils in audience take notes | | | | | | Option - take notes in a triangle format that reflects the Triangular Trade | | | | | 10 min| Discussion – value of primary sources, value of database | | | PowerPoint ‘The Map & the Database’ Slides 23&24 | | | Reflection – Pupils reflect on range of skills developed over the unit | | | |
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0629-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 4,
"total-input-tokens": 8612,
"total-output-tokens": 1722,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1525,
1
],
[
1525,
4644,
2
],
[
4644,
7112,
3
],
[
7112,
8580,
4
]
]
} |
5f810988467537ac262b504d9ff1c2eea6ceea73 | Interreg NWE Open call Interreg NWE – What is it?
• The Interreg North-West Europe (NWE) Programme is a transnational European Territorial Cooperation Programme to promote: • Economic • Environmental • Social and territorial future
• Budget to co-finance projects at a rate of 60% up to approximately €4m
• Project duration of 30-36 months Priorities
• The programme has identified three thematic priorities • Innovation • low carbon • resource and material efficiency.
• The three priorities cover a range of policy areas, including: • transport and mobility • renewable energy • climate change • resource efficiency
## Calls
| Priority | Specific Objective | |---------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Innovation | **SO1**: To enhance innovation performance of enterprises throughout NWE regions | | Low carbon | **SO2**: To facilitate the implementation of low-carbon, energy and climate protection strategies to reduce GHG emissions in NWE\
**SO3**: To facilitate the uptake of low carbon technologies, products, processes and services in sectors with high energy saving potential, to reduce GHG emissions in NWE\
**SO4**: To facilitate the implementation of transnational low-carbon solutions in transport systems to reduce GHG-emissions in NWE. | | Resource/ material efficiency | **SO5**: To optimise (re)use of material and natural resources in NWE | SO3: To facilitate the uptake of low carbon technologies, products, processes and services in sectors with high energy saving potential, to reduce GHG emissions in NWE
- “This specific objective will lead to reduced GHG emissions and pollution and optimise the regions’ energy consumption and production in the NWE areas. The expected result of initiatives undertaken within this specific objective will be the removal of barriers to the adoption of and improvement of conditions for low carbon technology deployment by enterprises.”
- **This might look like**: projects implementing low-carbon technologies by demonstrating new or existing low-carbon products, technologies, or solutions.
- Delivering and rolling out of emerging energy technologies
- Implementing transnational living labs to test and demonstrate the use of zero/low-carbon solutions in real life conditions
- Ensuring that new energy solutions are feasible (for example, finding ways to prevent bioenergy production from negatively affecting agricultural or water resources).
- **Impact**: Projects should focus on the environmental and economic impact associated with the zero/low carbon solution and demonstrate how the project will support further uptake of such solutions.
- **Total budget**: €51m available SO4: To facilitate the implementation of transnational low-carbon solutions in transports systems to reduce GHG-emissions in NWE
• “This specific objective will lead to reduced GHG emissions in transport systems in NWE. The Programme aims to improve the conception and coordination of low carbon transport and mobility solutions by the sector by increasing its institutional capacity.”
• **This might look like:** targeting *transport systems* such as networks of mobility connections, flows of passengers and goods, travel patterns, logistic chains, multimodal systems.
- Pilot or demonstration projects to bring accessible technologies or emerging solutions for low-carbon transportation closer to public use
- Testing and demonstrating low-carbon transport solutions in real life conditions, such as low-carbon or zero-carbon rolling stock, vehicles using alternative fuels, increasing levels of e-mobility, in NWE transport systems or networks
- Engaging with different kinds of transport operators to affect large-scale behavioural change
• **Impact:** Projects are required to demonstrate the transnational added value of their actions and how they will decrease GHG emissions.
• **Total budget:** €48m available Timeline
- Two stage submission
- Short initial concept note
- Maximum 10-month period to draw up full project plan Next steps
• Expression of interest form • LEPT will circulate appropriate partner searches • Discuss project ideas with LEPT
• LEPT briefing: http://www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/node/27326 • Interreg NWE: http://www.nweurope.eu/5b/ CIVITAS Activity Fund
http://www.civitas.eu/content/activity-fund CIVITAS Priorities
- **Car-Independent Lifestyles** – cycling, walking, car-sharing, bike-sharing, car-pooling, co-modality, ride-sharing
- **Clean Fuels and Vehicles** – electric mobility, fuelling infrastructures, hybrid vehicles, use of biodiesel, biogas and compressed natural gas, cleaner fleets
- **Collective Passenger Transport** – accessibility, intermodality, service improvements, ticketing systems, innovative PT systems, fleet management, procurement schemes
- **Demand Management Strategies** – congestion charging, access restrictions, parking management and strategies, low emission zones, car-free zones, priority lanes, mobility credits, financial incentives and disincentives
- **Integrated Planning** – land-use, housing, new developments, sustainable urban mobility plans
- **Mobility Management** – marketing and communications, personal and company travel plans, mobility info centres
- **Public Involvement** – multi-stakeholder consultations, information campaigns, participatory processes
- **Safety and Security** – traffic calming, infrastructure design, shared space, cycle highways, secure school paths, anti-vandalism measures
- **Transport Telematics** – intelligent transport systems, communication, routing, smartphone applications, plate recognition system
- **Urban Freight Logistics** – urban delivery centres, distribution schemes, fleet management, cycle logistics, freight partnerships, urban freight transport plans
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0631-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 10,
"total-input-tokens": 15894,
"total-output-tokens": 1542,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
23,
1
],
[
23,
349,
2
],
[
349,
643,
3
],
[
643,
1870,
4
],
[
1870,
3159,
5
],
[
3159,
4388,
6
],
[
4388,
4509,
7
],
[
4509,
4741,
8
],
[
4741,
4808,
9
],
[
4808,
6265,
10
]
]
} |
31a049bf20720ba4339f9941a24f2aed1040e45b | REVIEW OF THE 30 YEAR RULE
January 2009
# CONTENTS
Chairman’s Foreword iii
1. “Time to Look Again” 1
2. The Rule and the Act 3
3. International Comparisons 9
4. Domestic Developments 13
5. The Evidence 20
6. Our Assessment 26
7. Our Recommendations 30
8. Other Relevant Issues 35
Table of Recommendations 39
Appendix A: Cost Estimates 41
Appendix B: List of Contributors to the Work of the Review 43 PRIME MINISTER AND LORD CHANCELLOR
Of all historic records, those of government are perhaps the most significant, making a vital contribution to our national memory and identity, and also allowing citizens to call to account those who govern them. As a society we rightly place high expectations on public bodies to keep full and accurate records of their business, and subsequently to make them available to those in whose name they were created. With this in mind, you asked Professor Sir David Cannadine, Sir Joseph Pilling and myself to examine the ‘30 year rule’ – that is, the legal arrangements under which official records are made available to the public through The National Archives. We have completed our work and I am pleased now to present our report.
In the four decades since Harold Wilson’s government changed what was then a 50 year rule to 30 years, British society has changed decisively. A rule that secured a break with a more secretive past has itself been overtaken by developments such as the televising of Parliament, 24-hour news, email and web access and the unprecedented transparency of many of today’s public bodies. Parliament recognised these fundamental changes by passing the Freedom of Information Act, which reversed centuries-old official attitudes. Its presumption that official documents are “open” ceded to the electorate a measure of control over the records of government.
Above all this Act recognised that the relationship between government and citizen has changed. In a modern democracy, citizens’ trust in those who hold power is not unquestioning. Increasingly they expect to know how public bodies spend taxpayers’ money, why they take particular decisions, and what are their policies for the future. They are also increasingly aware that the growing number of memoirs being rushed out by politicians, civil servants and special advisers, while possessing their own fascination, are invariably self-serving and need to be counterbalanced by a dispassionate and true version of events. The Freedom of Information Act allows much of that truth to be released – albeit in a somewhat unsatisfactory patchwork fashion – putting the record straight and making the workings of Westminster and Whitehall more open, with the hope that a better-informed public and a more accountable government will improve the democratic process.
Our committee, however, was deeply aware that there are many good reasons why state records need to be kept confidential for a specific period of time and that there is a very necessary tension between the understandable need for governments to work in some privacy and the equally understandable wish of the people to know what is being done in their names. Our report examines whether the present 30 year rule sets the right tension, or whether a new system would be more appropriate for a 21st century democracy. In compiling it, we received evidence from politicians, civil servants, historians, the media and a wide variety of organisations and individuals. My thanks to them for their thoughts and suggestions. We were also significantly helped by many people across Whitehall and in local government, and we should like to express our special thanks to the staff of the Cabinet Office, the Foreign Office, the Home Office and the Ministry of Defence. The administrative and secretarial support for our review was provided by The National Archives, and we are indebted to James Strachan and Catriona Massey for their labours on our behalf. My profound gratitude also to David Cannadine and Joe Pilling for the generosity with which they gave their time, knowledge and advice to this fascinating project.
I would only add that, in my own case, what tipped the balance for a robust reduction was the hope that this might make a small but significant contribution to a more mature democracy in which there is a greater trust between the electors and the elected. Indeed, if there has been a corrosion of that trust between politicians and people over the past few years – and my belief is that there has been – our recommendations might, in the longer term, go a little way to restoring it. Certainly, the possibility that my own sons will have greater opportunities to understand the working and thinking of the governments they elect, will, I believe, make them more responsible citizens. Such openness might even result in better governance.
Paul Dacre Chairman of the 30 Year Rule Review 1
“TIME TO LOOK AGAIN”
1.1 On 25th October 2007 the Prime Minister, the Rt Hon Gordon Brown MP, in what was later dubbed his “Liberty” speech, announced a number of constitutional initiatives. One of them was an independent review of the ‘30 year rule’. To an audience at the University of Westminster he said:
“It is an irony that the information that can be made available on request on current events and current decisions is still withheld as a matter of course for similar events and similar decisions that happened 20 or 25 years ago.
“Under the present arrangements historical records are transferred to The National Archives and are only opened to public access after thirty years or where explicitly requested under the Freedom of Information Act. It is time to look again at whether historical records can be made available for public inspection much more swiftly than under the current arrangements.
“There are of course cost and security implications of a more open approach which we will need to examine thoroughly. So I have asked Paul Dacre, Editor-in-Chief of Associated Newspapers and member of the Press Complaints Commission – working with Sir Joe Pilling, former Permanent Secretary of the Northern Ireland Office, and the eminent historian David Cannadine – to review this rule.”
1.2 The terms of reference for the review were as follows:
The Prime Minister has appointed an independent team to review when government records are made available to the public. This review will centre on whether, in the light of Freedom of Information and other considerations, there should be any changes (and if so what) to the ‘30 year rule’ – the time span under which most public records are transferred to The National Archives and opened for inspection.
The review team will be chaired by Paul Dacre (Editor in Chief of Associated Newspapers and member of the Press Complaints Commission), who will work with Professor David Cannadine (Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother Professor of British History at the Institute of Historical Research, University of London), and Sir Joseph Pilling (former Permanent Secretary at the Northern Ireland Office).
The review team will seek to strike the balance between more openness and how long, in the interests of good governance and national security, state papers need to be kept closed. It will identify options for change and for implementation, bearing in mind such factors as cost, whether as part of any new arrangements some categories of information should be prioritised for release, and any other issues the team believes are relevant to modernising the existing system.
1 Paul Dacre ceased to be a member of the Press Complaints Commission in April 2008. He is now Chairman of the Editors’ Code Committee. To inform its recommendations, the review will gather evidence from and, where appropriate, consult with:
Previous administrations and political figures;
Users of the records, including the research community, the media and the public;
Government departments and agencies;
Others identified by the panel.
1.3 Such was our remit. We began work in December 2007, and took evidence from politicians, senior civil servants, historians and people working in the media. Over 100 individuals and organisations responded to our consultation, we heard the opinion of members of the public through our own online consultation, and we also commissioned an opinion poll which obtained the views of 2,300 people. In the pages that follow, we give an account of that evidence, offer our evaluation of it, draw our conclusions and make our recommendations. But we begin with a brief history of the 30 year rule, and the implications for it of the Freedom of Information Act. 2
THE RULE AND THE ACT
2.1 The ‘30 year rule’, which we have been asked to look into, is the shorthand term for the legal arrangements under which the government transfers its records to The National Archives with a view to their being made openly available for research by the time they are 30 years old. Before we can begin to assess their continued appropriateness or otherwise, in the light of the passing (2000) and implementation (2005) of the Freedom of Information [FoI] Act, we need to understand how these arrangements came to be made; and in order to be clear about that, we must look briefly at the historical background.
PAST PERSPECTIVES
2.2 For as long as governments have existed, they have kept documents and generated records: of their own deeds and doings, of their relations with other peoples and powers, and of the subjects and citizens in whose name they act. As governments have acquired and accumulated more responsibilities, and as they have become more powerful and intrusive, their activities, and thus their official records, have increasingly encompassed a wider range of functions and human activity: taxation and revenue, customs and excise, trade and commerce, the armed services and national security, foreign policy and imperial administration, justice and the law, business and enterprise, planning and the environment, education and the arts, science and technology, medicine and health.
2.3 Such records, dating back to the Domesday Book and medieval pipe rolls, are essential documentation for the history of the nation-state, and for our understanding of the working of government in earlier times. They also tell us much about the lives of ordinary people as they have come to the attention of the authorities: as recorded in the decennial censuses, as payers of different forms of taxation, as government employees both civilian and military, as the victims or perpetrators of crime, as scientists and doctors, and in myriad other contexts and circumstances.
2.4 It is only since 1845 that the archives of the government of the UK have been collected and preserved, and it was 11 years later that the Public Record Office opened in Chancery Lane, consolidating the storage of government records for the first time. It was subsequently moved in 1977 to Kew, and in 2003 the Public Record Office became The National Archives. The National Archives preserves the most important state papers and official documents for posterity, and makes them available to members of the public who wish to consult them, for professional or legal purposes (in the case of historians, lawyers and journalists), or out of personal interest (in the case of family history, or to establish legal rights).
2 The National Archives is the official government archive for England, Wales and the United Kingdom. This function is performed in Scotland by the National Archives of Scotland and in Northern Ireland by the Public Record Office of Northern Ireland. Its name was changed following the merger of the Public Record Office with the Historical Manuscripts Commission. TRANSFER
2.5 Official documents are only preserved in this way, and for this purpose, if they have been formally selected as being of lasting historical value. Government departments work with The National Archives to determine which of their records should be kept, and they have customarily been transferred to Chancery Lane, and latterly to Kew, within 30 years of their origination. There they are conserved, catalogued and stored, and they become a part of the permanent collection, where they join many millions of government records.
2.6 From departments such as the Foreign Office, whose records are of particular historical value, more than half of their materials may be selected for permanent preservation at Kew. But across central government as a whole, only five per cent of official documents are eventually transferred to The National Archives, following a sifting process by the departments which generated them. The remaining documents, which are deemed to be of no historical value, are destroyed according to agreed schedules and criteria. So while the holdings of The National Archives are voluminous, and are growing at an ever-expanding rate, they preserve for posterity only a tiny fraction of the official record.
ACCESS
2.7 Although most official documents deemed worthy of preservation have long been transferred, within 30 years, to the Public Record Office, and subsequently to The National Archives, the rules governing public access to them have a more complex history. It is helpful to begin with the Public Records Act of 1958, which made statutory provision for such access once the records were 50 years old.
2.8 In so doing, the Act struck what seemed an appropriate balance for the time between the necessary maintenance of confidentiality (the need to keep certain information restricted in the interests of good governance, collective responsibility and national security) and the wish to renounce secrecy (the deliberate withholding of information which the public should be able to see). Memories of the Second World War were recent, fears of another conflict were real, the men in Whitehall (and Westminster) were widely regarded as knowing what was best, and so the right of government to withhold all evidence of its workings for half a century was largely accepted.
2.9 Moreover, some records were closed for even longer than 50 years, at the request of particular government departments, and with the approval of the Lord Chancellor, acting on the advice of his Advisory Council and applying an agreed set of criteria. This might be (for example), because they were still being used (and were thus retained by the originating department), or because they contained confidential information relating to national security or sensitive material concerning individuals who were still alive.
______________________________________________________________________
3 Not all official records are transferred to Kew. The National Archives devolves care of about 25% of these records to approved ‘places of deposit’ across the UK, and lays down rules for the care of these records.
4 For a valuable discussion of the restricted access which was allowed in an earlier time, see T.G.Otte, ‘More Liberal Facilities for the Purpose of Historical Research’: Whitehall and Public Records in the Early Twentieth Century, Archives, xxxiii (2008), pp. 162-79.
5 The Lord Chancellor’s Advisory Council on National Archives and Records (LCAC) was established by the Public Records Act 1958 as the Advisory Council on Public Records, under the Chairmanship of the Master of the Rolls. Its membership comprises experts on records, such as journalists, academics, archivists, genealogists and civil servants. One of its principal roles is to recommend to the Lord Chancellor whether the public interest lies in releasing or withholding historical records. Where a department needs to retain a document beyond the 30 year point, permission must be sought from the Lord Chancellor who relies on LCAC’s advice. FROM 50 YEARS TO 30 YEARS
2.10 With all public records closed for at least 50 years, this meant that most politicians and civil servants could expect that papers concerning their work in government would not be made accessible before their careers (or, indeed, in many cases their lives) were over. This afforded them a sense of security from better-informed public scrutiny; but Harold Wilson, who became Prime Minister in 1964, took a different view. He believed that the 50 year access rule should be reduced, on the grounds that, “If criticisms are to be made of me and my conduct of affairs, I would rather be alive to answer them.” More generally, he urged that such a move towards greater openness would “let some light and air into our public records” and allow people a chance to “form a more considered judgement of the management of public business”.6
2.11 In 1966 Wilson announced the reduction of the closure period for government records from 50 to 30 years. But even this truncated time-frame still encompassed the career span of most civil servants, and so it continued to protect them from public scrutiny while they were at work. It also represented a political compromise with Edward Heath and Jo Grimond, the leaders of the other main parties, who respectively favoured more and less than 30 years.7
2.12 This new arrangement took effect from 1968, bringing ‘access’ to government documents into line with their ‘transfer’, in what was thus a consolidated 30 year rule. Since then, the majority of official records deemed worthy of preservation have become available to the public after 30 years when they are transferred to The National Archives (though the longer retention and closure periods which originated in the 1958 Act, and which were sanctioned by the Lord Chancellor continued to apply when necessary).
2.13 Accordingly, the tradition has continued that, at the end of each year, The National Archives announces the choicest items in the official records newly released from three decades before. Those made available last year for 1978, for example, reveal how the government of James Callaghan dealt with such matters as the growing awareness of Britain’s insufficient defences in the event of an attack from the Soviets; the challenges of deciding the date of the next general election in the face of a worsening economic crisis; and the Prime Minister’s determination to keep the leader of the Opposition, Margaret Thatcher, out of the royal box at a gala concert at the London Palladium commemorating 50 years of female suffrage.
SUBSEQUENT DEVELOPMENTS
2.14 Since 1968, the continued existence and particular duration of the consolidated 30 year rule has been periodically examined, most comprehensively in 1976 by the then Cabinet Secretary, Sir John Hunt. But nothing came of his investigation, nor of subsequent inquiries conducted by the then Head of the Civil Service, Sir Douglas Allen, and by Sir Duncan Wilson, sometime British Ambassador to Russia and former Assistant Keeper at the British Museum.
2.15 During the administration of John Major, renewed consideration was given to the possibility of releasing greater quantities of official information into the public domain. In 1992, William Waldegrave, the Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster, invited historians to submit “wish lists” stating which records they would find it useful to consult that were
______________________________________________________________________
6 The files relating to the introduction of the 30 year rule are now themselves available under the 30 year rule at The National Archives (reference PREM 13/1957). 7 See Hansard for 9th March 1966, cols 561-3, and 10th August 1966, cols 1706-8. currently closed for more than 30 years. Having reviewed these lists, the government responded by opening many of the documents that had been requested. As a result, papers were released covering such matters as the flight of Rudolf Hess to Britain in May 1941 and the signal intelligence shown to Winston Churchill during the Second World War. During the same year, Waldegrave announced that in future the records of the Joint Intelligence Committee would be reviewed and released on the same basis as other public records, and Douglas Hurd, the Foreign Secretary, made known that the Special Operations Executive (SOE) archive would also be reviewed for release.
2.16 In 1993, following on from the ‘Waldegrave initiative’, the Major administration published a White Paper on Open Government, which determined that in future, significant amounts of official information would be proactively placed in the public domain at the time it had been produced (or soon after), or that it might be made available if asked for. A Code of Practice was introduced to guide departments in implementing the new policy, and in this changed climate of opinion and operation, ministers and civil servants began to accommodate themselves both to the earlier disclosure of many official documents, and to public requests for such information.
2.17 This Open Government White Paper also urged some changes to the access arrangements, outlining proposals to reduce the amount of material that departments were retaining beyond 30 years. It set “exact new criteria” for extended retention and closure, it recommended specific closure periods and it required departments to justify why certain records could not be released. This in turn led to the opening of tens of thousands of official papers. Although the exact figures are difficult to calculate, one surviving document indicates that between April and September 1994, 2284 files and 1051 extracts were released that had previously been unavailable to the public.
THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT
2.18 In 1997, Tony Blair’s newly-elected government announced its intention to introduce an FoI Bill, which would establish a new public right: to request information from any official record, whatever its age. The FoI Act came into effect in 2005, and it effectively turned the existing arrangement on its head. Before the FoI Act came into force, official records were presumed closed until they were at least 30 years old and had been transferred to the National Archives. Under FoI, such information is presumed open from the time it is created, and long before it is transferred to the National Archives, and it must be made available unless specific exemption criteria apply.
2.19 As we explain in more detail in Chapter Four, under the provisions of FoI, anyone can request official information, no matter how recent or confidential, from central, devolved and local government, and from approximately 100,000 public bodies, and the recipient of any such enquiries must respond within 20 working days. Since the FoI Act came into force, over 30,000 requests have been made annually to central government.
2.20 However, some categories of information can remain closed under exemptions specified in the FoI Act, which superseded the criteria for extended closure that operated under the 50 year and 30 year rules. Some of these exemptions are specific to particular types of record – for instance information supplied by or relating to the security and intelligence agencies and court records are automatically exempt from disclosure. Other exemptions involve forming a judgement as to whether some damage would result if the material were released – examples are records relating to national security, international relations and commercial interests. With many exemptions there is a further judgement to be made, namely whether the public interest lies in releasing or withholding the information.
2.21 Even when it has been decided by the public body that such an exemption does apply, either before or after 30 years, anyone requesting official information under FoI has the right to appeal against that decision, initially to the Information Commissioner, then to the Information Tribunal, and then to the High Court, the Court of Appeal and ultimately the House of Lords. At any of these levels of appeal, the public authority’s decision may be upheld or overturned.
2.22 Many of the exemptions fall away at a specified period and cannot be applied once official information reaches a certain age. Nine of the FoI Act’s exemptions cease to apply after 30 years, concerning (for example) material that could prejudice relations within the UK; that might harm the effective conduct of public affairs; that is concerned with the formulation of government policy; that relates to legal professional privilege, or to commercial interests; and also communications with the royal household.
2.23 A few exemptions last for longer. Material relating to the working of the honours system is closed for 60 years, and documents concerned with “law enforcement” – the prevention or detection of crime, the operation of immigration controls, the maintenance of security and good order in prisons – are closed for 100 years. Some exemptions have no specified time limit, including those concerning national security, international relations, and defence.
2.24 Some records are not transferred to The National Archives at 30 years, but are retained by departments for longer, either because of their continued sensitivity or because they are still in current use. Other records that are transferred to The National Archives at 30 years also remain closed, but departments must consult the Lord Chancellor’s Advisory Council before it is agreed to apply a period of extended closure. And some documents are made available, but with names redacted, in order to preserve essential confidentiality.
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE FOI ACT AND THE 30 YEAR RULE
2.25 Under the FoI regime that has been in place since 2005, the 30 year rule remains in operation, albeit in a modified way. Most government records deemed worthy of preservation are still transferred to The National Archives by the time they are 30 years old. It is at that point that they are defined in the FoI Act as being ‘historical’, and it is then that many of the FoI exemptions restricting public access fall away.
2.26 But it is also the case that as a result of FoI a great deal of official information is now available, if requested by members of the public, well before the 30 year point at which, until that measure came into force, it was initially accessible. Prior to the implementation of FoI, 30 years was the first stage at which records could be opened; but under FoI, 30 years has become the last point at which most records must be opened.
- In theory, while communications with the royal household are only exempt for 30 years, in practice most remain closed for much longer by the application of other exemptions which continue to apply after 30 years.
\*\* Although the vast majority of records would be closed for 30 years, the Lord Chancellor did have the authority to approve accelerated opening in some cases. 2.27 Hence the central question posed in our terms of reference: “whether, in the light of FoI and other considerations, there should be any changes (and if so what) to the ‘30 year rule’”. Do we need any such rule? Should it be modified? If so, then what is the appropriate period? These are the matters that we shall address in this inquiry.
2.28 By way of preliminary, it will be helpful to obtain some sense of global patterns and trends. To this end we shall briefly survey how such transfer and access rules concerning official documents operate in other countries, and we shall also consider the impact of FoI legislation as it has been enacted elsewhere. 3
INTERNATIONAL COMPARISONS
3.1 As is the case in the United Kingdom, most modern democracies have established regulations governing their historical records and official documents. In this chapter, we try to outline how transfer and access rules are operated by other nations, and also how Freedom of Information [FoI] legislation has been implemented elsewhere in the world.
3.2 Although it might seem a straightforward matter, this is by no means an easy task. Different governments operate varied systems for preserving their archives and for making official information available to the public. In some countries – as in the United Kingdom since devolution – there are distinct access procedures at alternative levels of government, which further complicates making international comparisons. And in the United States, Presidential papers are handled differently from all other records of the federal government.
3.3 We have therefore sought to concentrate on general trends regarding transfer and access rules and FoI legislation, and since our survey must be (and could only be) selective, our conclusions, though suggestive, are necessarily tentative.
TRANSFER AND ACCESS
3.4 At the present time, most functioning democracies have determined a fixed point at which government records have to be transferred to an official repository and made accessible and available to the public. One exception is Canada, which operates no fixed transfer or access rule, and where arrangements are made between the originating government departments and the Library and Archives of Canada. Another is Sweden, where – although there is a long-established FoI law – documents may be withheld from public access for anything from two to 70 years or more, usually at the discretion of the government agency that created them.
3.5 Among nations which do operate transfer and access rules, some are more conservative. There are many countries which, like the United Kingdom, favour 30 years, including the Republic of Ireland, Germany and Australia (in the case of the federal government). And there are some where the period is shorter: in the Netherlands and South Africa, it has been set at 20 years since 1996, and in France, legislation passed in July 2008 reduced the closure period for some records from 30 to 25 years.
3.6 While it is difficult to generalise about these rules, the experience of two countries is worth highlighting.
3.7 In the United States, the 1978 Presidential Records Act changed the ownership of the official records of the President – by far the most crucial American state papers – from the former Presidents themselves to the American people. It also introduced a very liberal access rule: under the US FoI Act (for which see below), the public can look at Presidential records five years after an administration has ended, and although former Presidents can invoke six restrictions on such access, they can only do so for up to 12 years. 3.8 Other public authorities in the United States also release information in a fairly liberal fashion. The proceedings of special boards or commissions are usually published within ten years, and it is standard practice to make available the records of the Department of Justice before they are 15 years old.
3.9 Like Canada and Sweden, New Zealand has no fixed access point for its government papers. They must be transferred to Archives New Zealand within 25 years, but most of them are transferred and opened well before then.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
3.10 A few nations have long-established FoI laws, and it appears that Sweden was the first to enact a recognisable version of such legislation as long ago as 1766. But most such measures have only been recently passed, the first significant instance being in the United States, where its FoI Act was signed into law by President Lyndon Johnson on Independence Day in 1966.
3.11 In the years since then, many international organisations have encouraged their member states to enact a public right of access to official information. To this end, the Commonwealth, the Council of Europe, and the Organisation of American States have all drafted guidelines and model legislation for their members. Financial institutions, too, such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank, have encouraged the adoption of FoI laws with the aim of reducing corruption in the governments of the nations to which they give aid and assistance, and of making their financial systems more accountable.
3.12 During the last 30 years the enactment of FoI legislation has become more widespread. In France and the Netherlands, such laws came into force in 1978, and Australia, Canada and New Zealand followed suit in the early 1980s. Since the millennium, South Africa and the United Kingdom have introduced their own FoI acts, and the most recent example of such legislation is Germany, which passed its measure in 2005.
3.13 Although this can be no more than an impressionistic estimate, it seems that, today, approximately one half of the world’s population live in countries which have some form of FoI law, and it is certainly the case that most western nations have passed such legislation.
3.14 The practical effects of these FoI acts are disputed. Here is one version. It seems clear that in New Zealand, the passing of the Official Information Act in 1982 has had a very liberalising effect on public access to such materials, and also on the proactive willingness of government to make them available. Indeed, on occasions, Cabinet papers have been released immediately after a meeting has taken place. The Act is generally held by New Zealanders to have had a very positive effect, and Mark Prebble, until recently the head of the New Zealand Civil Service, has described it as “the most significant and valuable reform that has affected the public service during [his] career”.
3.15 But there are also alternative perspectives on these recent developments. There is further evidence from New Zealand that Cabinet papers are “smoothed off” with a view to their likely early release, with sensitive matters not officially recorded. Human rights organisations point out that many FoI laws are inadequate, or lie dormant, or have exemptions which are too easily exploited. The promise of freedom of access to official information may thus be illusory.
11 Free and Frank: Making the Official Information Act 1982 work better, Nicola White, 2007. 3.16 Nevertheless, it seems indisputable that, in statute at least, and often in practice as well, much of the world is moving inexorably in the direction of expecting and experiencing greater openness and transparency – and thus accountability – in the work of government.
**CURRENT TRENDS**
3.17 It is difficult to generalise about international rules concerning the transfer and access of official documents, and also about the extent to which recent FoI legislation has been substantive and effective rather than merely cosmetic and symbolic. But it does seem clear that as such legislation has become more widespread, and as official cultures of openness, transparency and accountability have been strengthened, there has also been a discernible trend towards the liberalisation of the rules concerning the transfer of government documents, or concerning public access to them, or both.
3.18 Here are some recent developments that seem worth highlighting:
- In the Republic of Ireland, the FoI (Amendment) Act came into force in 2003, as a result of which Cabinet minutes must now be released no later than ten years after their creation.
- In Germany, there is a draft proposal to reduce the existing 30 year rule to a ten year rule for “ordinary documents”.
- In the Netherlands, which in 1995 reduced its 50 year rule to 20 years, the government announced in December 2005 that it was looking to liberalise its regime still further, and a draft Bill to this effect is currently being considered.
- In Australia, the government of Queensland has agreed to recommendations that the timescale for the complete release of Cabinet documents be reduced from 30 to 20 years – the lowest in the country. In addition, Queensland’s government plans to remove the Cabinet exemption after ten years so that access to specific information will be available on application, in line with the public interest test. These changes will be implemented by mid-2009.
- Even in Spain – which has no FoI legislation or fixed access rule – the Defence Minister announced proposals in August this year to declassify defence documents which have been inaccessible until now.
**CONCLUSION**
3.19 It bears repeating that such international comparisons are invariably impressionistic, and that it is not easy to infer anything other than general trends from this brief survey. But in a world where people expect more rapid access than ever to information, both official and otherwise, it seems clear that FoI laws have recently become part of the accepted working conditions of many democratically-elected governments and that they are on the increase around the globe.
3.20 To be sure, there seems no clear evidence to support some of the more extravagant claims that have been made for FoI, namely that accelerated and timely disclosure of official records correspondingly increases public trust in government and in the democratic process. But the evidence that is available from countries that have maintained FoI for two decades or more, such as New Zealand and Canada, suggests that greater openness does result in a measure of increased government accountability and democratic engagement. 3.21 It is equally clear that some western governments have in place significantly more open regimes than our own, and also that where there are fixed access rules there is a noticeable trend, as a result of FoI, towards greater liberalisation and openness. From such an international perspective, the UK now operates one of the less liberal access regimes to its official records, and this suggests the preliminary conclusion that a significant reduction to the 30 year rule would be both timely and appropriate. 4
DOMESTIC DEVELOPMENTS
4.1 In the light of these international comparisons, we now turn to consider recent domestic developments in the United Kingdom which, taken together, cast further doubt on the continued appropriateness of the 30 year rule. They are as follows: the existence and operation of the Freedom of Information [FoI] Act itself; the increased transparency of central government; the varied practices of devolved administrations; the growing openness of local government; the relative ease of access to information concerning public bodies; the use of government records that are less than 30 years old in the researching and writing of Official Histories; and the impact of the publication of memoirs by retired politicians and former civil servants.
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION
4.2 The FoI legislation was a response to society’s changed expectations concerning what governments and other official bodies should reveal about themselves, and when they should reveal it. Some of our witnesses argued that the UK government has not fully reconciled itself to the implications of its own Act; that the presumption of openness regarding official records has not yet become actual openness; and that the enhanced culture of transparency that the Act was passed to help promote has been slow to take root. Nevertheless, it is clear that FoI has resulted in a great deal of official information being provided to people which would not have been available previously.
4.3 In general, the older the document that is asked for, the more likely the request for it is to be granted without demur by the authority to which the request has been made. But there have also been many notable disclosures under FoI of more recent records, often as a result of appeals to the Information Commissioner and even higher authorities. These include: the full publication of official papers relating to the events of ‘Black Wednesday’ when some of the officials involved were still employed by government; an early draft of the so-called ‘dodgy dossier’ on Iraq’s alleged weapons of mass destruction; the release of the Attorney-General’s advice to the Prime Minister on the legality of military action against Iraq; the details of the contracts awarded by the Olympic Delivery Authority; documents relating to renewable energy target-setting; hundreds of files relating to UFOs; and detailed breakdowns of MPs’ expense claims.
4.4 Such disclosures of recent and controversial documents have sometimes been the result of an extended appeal process by the person who made the original request, and on occasions (as with material released relating to the war in Iraq) they have caused embarrassment to the government. But they also represent a marked improvement in official openness and transparency, and based on the evidence we have heard, we support the view that FoI legislation has brought significant public benefit. The organised release of information by governments is now widely regarded as a natural part of our political culture and of the democratic process, and indeed it arguably helps to strengthen both. 4.5 As the examples given above suggest, most requests made under FoI are for official documents that are substantially less than 30 years old, relating to issues that are recent or even current. But despite technically being available under FoI rules, the vast majority of official documents that are not requested under FoI remain effectively invisible until the 30 year point is reached, when those that have been selected for preservation are transferred to, and systematically released by, The National Archives.
4.6 This means that the practical effect on the 30 year rule of the FoI Act has been what might be termed ‘patchwork history’ – an illogical situation in which (for example) some two-year-old documents are requested and released but the majority of others, most of which will be no more sensitive, will not be made available for a further 28 years, when they are transferred to The National Archives and made accessible there, because no one has asked for them under FoI. This is inconsistent and goes against modern expectations of more rapid access to a broad range of official information. Moreover, these isolated releases make it impossible for anyone to build up a fully-rounded picture of past events. Indeed, since they are taken out of the broader archival and documentary context, they can be positively misleading.
CENTRAL GOVERNMENT
4.7 As well as requiring government at all levels, and other public bodies, to provide information to people on request, FoI also aims, in the spirit of the Code of Practice introduced in the Major years, to ensure that departments make more of their information proactively available as a matter of course. Like all public bodies, government departments are now required to specify very clearly the material they publish, how it is published and whether it is available free of charge.
4.8 Routinely, departments put up on their websites a large amount of information about their work and about what they do. Every departmental website contains organisation charts, data and details of its ministers, the remit of its responsibilities, recent media releases, and information about current consultations and pending legislation.
4.9 Some departments publish guidance: the Foreign Office website contains current travel advice, while the Treasury publishes economic data, and both these departments offer a YouTube channel to view interviews, presentations and speeches. The Treasury also provides Really Simple Syndication feeds that deliver information directly to subscribers, while the Foreign Office uses Flickr to publish photographs of its ministers and details of their engagements. Moreover, most government departments now have their own “bloggers” – from Secretaries of State to diplomats posted overseas.
4.10 It would be an exaggeration to say that all departments have fully grasped the opportunities presented by the internet to demystify the workings of government; but there has certainly been a significant increase in both the volume and the candour of the official information made available during recent years. One indication is the annual growth – both in extent and transparency – of that most significant of government documents, the Budget.
4.11 In 1998, the details of the Budget that were published amounted to 165 pages. A year later the government decided to produce two documents, one entitled Economic and Fiscal Policy, the other being the Financial Statement and Budget, and since then the provision of information has grown steadily, including more analysis of trends at both national and global level, along with a greater amount of background detail, illustrated by numerous graphs and tables. There has been an additional shift towards linking the Budget’s specific measures with the government’s wider economic policy and objectives. By 2007, 326 pages were published concerning the Budget, providing a detailed insight into the thinking of the Treasury and the state of the nation’s finances.
DEVOLVED ADMINISTRATIONS
4.12 In the recently-devolved administrations of Scotland and Wales and the re-devolved administration of Northern Ireland, many official records are now being released before 30 years, and often much earlier.
4.13 In Scotland (which is outside the remit of this review), there is no legally defined point by which official records must be transferred to The National Archives of Scotland. But in practice most of them are transferred well before they are 30 years old. Following the introduction of the FoI (Scotland) Act, files are released at the point when they are deemed by Scottish Executive officials to be no longer sensitive, and this is often at 15 or 20 years.
4.14 Wales is legally subject to the 30 year transfer and access rules of the United Kingdom, but in practice, the Welsh Assembly Government transfers records to The National Archives well before 30 years, and they are released on the same basis as other records transferred to The National Archives.
4.15 Northern Ireland has its own Public Records Act, which provides for a 20 year transfer point. General release of information occurs at 30 years, although Northern Ireland is also subject to the provisions of the United Kingdom FoI Act.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
4.16 Local government in England has a comparatively long tradition of openness and accessibility. Indeed, the first legislation requiring local authorities to make public many of their decisions and proceedings dates back to the early 1960s, and a range of measures have subsequently been put onto the statute book to enhance the public’s right to know about decision-making in their community.
4.17 It is, for instance, ten years since the Audit Commission Act 1998 obliged local authorities and police authorities to open their accounts for public inspection. Section 15 of the Act allows any elector or taxpayer in the area the right to inspect them, and to make copies of contracts, invoices and receipts that are related to the recent financial year (with certain exemptions for commercial confidentiality). Local electors also have a right to ask the appointed auditor questions about these matters.
4.18 Even more significantly, the Local Government Act 2000 established a number of new rights of access. Meetings at which “key decisions” are discussed or taken must be open to the public, reports, agendas and background papers for them must be made available at least three days in advance, and regularly updated rolling “forward plans” detail future decisions to be taken and the documents relating to them. The meetings are recorded, including the reasons for the decisions that were reached, and alternative options which were considered and rejected are also described. These records are then put up on local authority websites. 4.19 Advances in technology have given a further spur to openness. Some councils – including most notably the Greater London Assembly – broadcast their meetings live over their own website, and many local authorities publish full sets of minutes on their websites, although they are not statutorily obliged to do so.
4.20 While comparison is only partially valid because of the difference in the work undertaken by central and local government, it is clear that the latter is under a more onerous obligation than the former when it comes to openness and transparency. Moreover, we found no evidence that this had had a deleterious impact on the quality of decision making at local level.
PUBLIC BODIES
4.21 Like central, devolved and local government, public bodies are by definition publicly accountable. There are over 100,000 of them in the United Kingdom, including non-departmental public bodies – or NDPBs – such as the Environment Agency and the Competition Commission, advisory bodies (such as the Advisory Committee on NHS Drugs and the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments), and also schools, hospitals, police forces, museums and galleries. Many of them are increasingly and proactively opening their records, putting them up on their websites to ensure immediate access and wide availability.
4.22 One significant example is the Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) of the Bank of England. When it was set up in 1997 it was required by the Treasury to publish its minutes six weeks after each meeting. In 1998 the MPC voluntarily decided to reduce this interlude to the shortest period that was practically possible (two weeks), meaning that the minutes of each meeting are publicly available before the next one. MPC minutes always include a general assessment of the economic situation, provide arguments in favour of various courses of action, and specify how each committee member voted. Although much background information is not published, the material that is released does help the financial sector understand the reasons behind the MPC’s decisions, and prepare for the longer term. It has also done much to educate the public about such matters as the causes of inflation and how it can be tackled.
4.23 The United Kingdom’s NDPBs are responsible for providing a wide range of services, regulation and guidance, they produce a substantial amount of material that is of interest to the public, and many of them place a strong emphasis on openness. The Environment Agency, for example, describes itself as “an open and transparent organisation” that encourages the public to seek information about its work. It publishes the agenda and open papers of its Board Meetings before they take place, and the minutes are available on its website soon afterwards. The Financial Services Authority (FSA) publishes summary minutes of its Board meetings shortly after they have occurred and its Records Management Policy ensures that “full and accurate record of all business activities” are maintained and available under FoI, including letters, e-mails, telephone recordings and the minutes of meetings.
4.24 Documents published in this way by NDPBs are often of immediate relevance and they do not need the long-term protection provided by the 30 year rule. Nevertheless, this increased transparency has served to heighten public expectations regarding the amount and type of official information that should be released, and at what time. We are not aware of
12 The Governor of the Bank of England’s letter to Giles Radice MP, then Chairman of the Commons Treasury Committee, explaining this decision may be found at http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetarypolicy/radice.pdf any public body that has been damaged by this practice, and in some cases, early release may have helped increase public understanding and thus public trust. To have to wait 30 years to obtain access to similar documents from other bodies seems an excessively long time by contrast, and creates an impression that the present rule condones unnecessary secrecy, rather than protects necessary confidentiality.
OFFICIAL HISTORIES
4.25 The programme under which governments produce “official histories” of key events and episodes dates back a century, when an initiative was taken in 1908 to start “compiling the naval and military history of the nation”(^{13}). Since 1945 this has been the responsibility of the Cabinet Office. Originally, the programme concentrated on military history but in 1966, the same year that he reduced the 50 year rule to the 30 year rule, Prime Minister Harold Wilson announced that the range of official histories was to be extended to include peacetime subjects.
4.26 Today, the programme – overseen by a Cabinet Committee on Official Histories – aims to provide “authoritative histories in their own rights; a reliable source for historians until all the records are available in The National Archives; and ‘a fund of experience’ for future government use.” Subjects for inclusion are selected initially by the Cabinet Committee and are then considered by a group of Privy Counsellors. The scholars identified to research and write these histories are given access to all relevant material in government archives, whether they are publicly available or not.
4.27 Recent subjects that have been treated in the Official Histories programme include the Falklands Campaign and the building of the Channel Tunnel – both of which clearly took place less than 30 years ago. Works in preparation or awaiting commission include the development of North Sea oil and gas, privatisation, devolution and policy towards the former Yugoslavia.
4.28 As these examples suggest, the use by scholars of unreleased government files is vital to the effective working of the Official History programme. This provides what might be termed ‘indirect’ public access to a portion of the official record well before the period of 30 years lapses. But this practice naturally raises the question of why all the documents themselves cannot be released earlier, at the same time as the official histories which are based on them are published.
MEMOIRS
4.29 A less official version of recent history is provided by the memoirs of those who have left office (or, in some instances, have left government employment). Our analysis of such publications as have appeared over the last 25 years (the results of which are shown in Figure 4.1) reveals that the frequency of such works, and the speed of their production, has barely changed. Of 28 memoirs surveyed, 12 were published within one year of the author leaving office, and a further six appeared within another 12 months.
(^{13}) See also http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/publicationscheme/published_information/1/officialhistory.aspx 4.30 Since the millennium, however, there has been a growing trend for such accounts of government to emanate not just from ministers but also from former civil servants and special advisers. In recent years such memoirs have been produced by:
- Sir Christopher Meyer, the first British Ambassador to chronicle his time in Washington so candidly and so closely to the events he was describing;
- Dame Stella Rimington, the first head of MI5 to write a book revealing details about the functioning of one of the intelligence agencies;
- Alastair Campbell, Tony Blair’s communications chief, who published an account of his time in Downing Street soon after leaving (his volume appeared shortly after that of another prime ministerial press officer, Lance Price); and
- Jonathan Powell, who wrote a book describing his part in the Northern Ireland peace process.
4.31 In principle, these memoirs are subject to a code of conduct that was developed in 1975, after the government had unsuccessfully tried to prevent the publication of the Crossman diaries (which had revealed details of Cabinet meetings for the first time). Under what are termed the ‘Radcliffe’ rules, such memoirs may not reveal secrets that could prejudice national security, international relations, or confidential advice provided by an official for 15 years, and for longer if the official in question is still serving. Before publication, these memoirs should be submitted to the Cabinet Secretary, who may insist on changes to the text. However, the Cabinet Secretary has no effective legal sanction against publication, which means that determined authors can say almost anything they want, and our impression is that it is becoming increasingly difficult to maintain and enforce these rules.
4.32 Such memoirs, usually published soon after their author has left office, and while the political issues remain fresh, are one of the unofficial means by which the workings of government and, on occasions, the relations between ministers and civil servants, are exposed very rapidly to the public gaze. They often give a vivid and highly personal account of life in Whitehall and Westminster, but since the official records relating to policy discussions and decisions generally remain closed for 30 years, unless subject to a successful request for access under FoI, it is impossible for the public to know how fair or accurate they are. Moreover, the airing of important political and governmental issues relating to the relatively recent past tends to undermine the continued existence of the 30 year rule for official records, by reinforcing increased expectations of openness.
CONCLUSION
4.33 The developments that we have described here may be briefly summarised as follows. The passing and implementation of FoI means that a great deal of official information can now be accessed by the general public long before it is 30 years old. Central government, the devolved administrations, local government and public bodies proactively publish substantial amounts of material well before the 30 year threshold is reached. And official histories and unofficial memoirs, each providing their own accounts of recent events, further undermine the principle that public records are not generally available for three decades unless specifically requested under FoI. Taken together, these domestic developments cast serious doubt on the continued credibility and sustainability of the present 30 year rule. 5
THE EVIDENCE
5.1 Having made some tentative international comparisons, and having outlined some important recent domestic developments concerning the increased availability of official records and information, we now set out the opinions on the 30 year rule which are currently held by the various national constituencies that we consulted: the general public and other interested parties, the media, professional historians, civil servants, and former ministers and politicians. We summarise below the views expressed by each group.
THE GENERAL PUBLIC AND OTHER INTERESTED PARTIES
5.2 In order to try to gauge public opinion on this matter, we asked YouGov to conduct an opinion poll on our behalf (the results of which are shown in Figure 5.1). Polls can err, and such research can only be undertaken among a small if statistically valid sample; but we did find consistent patterns which we believe reflect widely held views.
5.3 The poll showed strong support for a significant reduction in the 30 year rule, with a clear majority – 62% – in favour of 15 years or less. More than a quarter preferred a reduction to five years, while only 13% supported the status quo or an increase beyond the present figure.
5.4 To test the strength of the arguments the sample was divided into three groups. A control (sample A) was asked to choose from a range of options for the rule, ranging from 50 years downwards. A second group (sample B) was exposed to arguments in favour of: a) reducing the current 30 year rule and b) keeping or extending it, before being asked to choose from the same list of options. The third group (sample C) was presented with the same arguments but in reverse order, and then asked to choose. Interestingly enough, exposure to the arguments both for and against reducing the rule increased the already clear support for reduction by 20%.
5.5 The poll also revealed that the results were the same regardless of political affiliation, demographic segment or geographical location.
| Percentage of sample | Control Sample A | Main Sample B | Main Sample C | |----------------------|------------------|---------------|---------------| | Extended to 50 years | 4.9 | 1.5 | 1.5 | | Kept at 30 years | 23.9 | 8.4 | 13.6 | | Reduced to 25 years | 13.6 | 6.7 | 4.4 | | Reduced to 20 years | 14.2 | 4.7 | 4.4 | | Reduced to 15 years | 12.5 | 5.7 | 5.7 | | Reduced to 10 years | 12.4 | 11.6 | 10.5 | | Reduced to 5 years | 16 | 24.3 | 21.7 | | Don’t know | 29.3 | 28.8 | 28.8 |
Figure 5.1: YouGov 30 year rule review survey results 5.6 The results of this YouGov research bear out those from our own online consultation, conducted following an advertising campaign in the national and regional press. Of those who took part, 89% were in favour of reducing the 30 year rule. The many comments that were submitted varied greatly; but they indicated a general feeling that “these are our records”; that the public have a right to information about what governments do “in our name”; that earlier release might help rebuild trust and confidence between government and people; and that records ought to be proactively published rather than merely made reactively available in response to public requests. All of the comments for which permission to publish was given are available on our website.14
5.7 Taken together, these surveys showed that more than 80% of our sample favoured reduction, with very nearly one half indicating that such a reduction ought to be to less than 15 years.15 We can therefore conclude that the general public – when they consider these issues – are overwhelmingly likely to favour substantial downward revision to the 30 year rule.
| The 30 year rule should be... | % | |-------------------------------|---| | More than 30 years | 1.6% | | 30 years (i.e. no change) | 10.5% | | Reduced to 25 years | 4.8% | | Reduced to 20 years | 14.1% | | Reduced to 15 years | 12.2% | | Less than 15 years | 49.7% | | Don’t know | 7.1% |
5.8 The public mainly submitted their views to us online, but in addition, more than 100 individuals and organisations from a wide cross-section of national life gave formal submissions or attended sessions to give us their views in person. This evidence is also available on our website, and once again, the conclusions are clear: 62% of our respondents were in favour of reduction of the rule and 13% against, while 25% gave no view, preferring to describe the consequences of change and list the matters that should be taken into account by the review. Figure 5.2 gives a statistical summary of all the views we obtained as to whether the 30 year rule should be reduced:
14 www.30yearrulereview.org.uk 15 This table combines the results of the review’s own online consultation with those of the opinion poll carried out for us by YouGov. THE MEDIA
5.9 Perhaps unsurprisingly, those whom we consulted from the media were unanimous in favouring a substantial reduction, believing that it would increase the transparency of government and improve the quality of public understanding and discussion. They told us that in today’s world the 30 year rule had become “at best increasingly irrelevant, and at worst redundant”(^{16}), since so much information of various kinds was available many years before it is released by The National Archives. But they also deplored the lack of a fully available official record which could verify (or cast doubt on) what was already known and also fill the gaps in public knowledge. According to Mark Thompson, Director-General of the BBC, the Freedom of Information [FoI] Act had ‘established the principle of earlier disclosure and has illustrated the value of it’, but this ‘does not mean that the most illuminating and useful material is put into the public domain.’ As David Hencke, a distinguished investigative journalist, explained: it was possible to “circumvent” the 30 year rule by making specific requests under FoI, but that the resulting picture was unavoidably partial and regrettably random.
5.10 It was also pointed out to us that the earlier release of official information would mean that the media itself was better informed, and thus able to promote a more mature public debate on contemporary issues. This would, it was argued, improve governance by ensuring that mistakes made in the relatively recent past could be studied and analysed and avoided in the future. At the moment it is only possible to study the full record of events that took place 30 years ago, which seem to most people “remote and unimportant” and from “a bygone age” that only those who were 45 or over would remember.
5.11 It was further argued that earlier release would help neutralise the tendency in certain parts of the media to sensationalise a story simply because an FoI request has been refused by the government. Such refusals may be entirely proper and lawful, but they can be portrayed as being part of a suspicious conspiracy to withhold information. One witness said that he believed that governments withheld too much information that did not deserve to be classified, while The Press Association told us that “the longer information is kept secret, the deeper [becomes] the entrenchment of distrust.”
PROFESSIONAL HISTORIANS
5.12 Historians took a less uniform view of the issues than either the general public or those of our witnesses from the media. In general, they agreed that the 30 year rule now appears “odd and anachronistic”, and they also urged that knowledge of past public affairs can help us to learn and apply beneficial lessons for today and the future, thereby improving governance and democracy. “The study of public policy”, noted Professor Paul Addison, “provides a store of experience about the recent past, and an assessment of the successes and failures of government, upon which all participants in the political nation are free to draw.” History, it was suggested, now embraces recent times in a way that was not true when the 30 year rule was instituted, and its continued existence has thus become “an impediment to historical research” rather than a facilitator of it.
5.13 Historians tended to share the media’s view that earlier release of official records would enhance public understanding and improve the development and implementation of government policy by encouraging free discussion of serious issues. Some believed that the debate between academia, the media and government has degenerated substantially in recent years, and that the continued closure of official records for 30 years has contributed to “theorising”, trivialisation and “the establishment of impregnable myths”, all of which were
(^{16}) Joint response from the Newspaper Publishers Association, the Newspaper Society, the Periodical Publishers Association, the Society of Editors, the Scottish Daily Newspaper Society, ITN and the Society of Editors. seen as unhealthy. In the words of Professor Sir Brian Harrison: “since the past is the only source of guidance for human beings, it is worth making knowledge of it readily available, rather than having a hiatus in the recent past before ‘history’ gets into gear.”
5.14 But these views were not universally shared, and some historians preferred the status quo because, as Professor Rodney Lowe put it, the “current legislation offers an ideal mix.” Both enthusiasts for earlier release of official documents and those who were more cautious expressed some fears about the possible effect of a reduction in the 30 year rule. These included the following: that financial constraints could diminish standards of record-keeping functions such as cataloguing by expert staff; that the prospect of earlier disclosure would result in fewer, poorer or more cautious records being kept; that it could encourage more retention and destruction of documents by government departments; and that international relations with allies based on mutual confidence might suffer as a result.
THE CIVIL SERVICE
5.15 Both retired civil servants and those currently in post expressed some concerns about any modification in the present 30 year rule which might lead to the premature disclosure of official records. They repeatedly reaffirmed the value and importance of the current practice, whereby confidential advice given by civil servants to ministers is protected under an FoI exemption for 30 years, on the grounds that this allows debate about policy options (which may be extremely controversial) to be completely frank and unhampered by any concern that the records of such discussions will become public before the policy is settled and implemented. They argued that such protection, which is often called ‘safe space’, makes for better government because it increases trust and candour between ministers and their officials, and also between ministers themselves, providing an environment that fosters robust and wide ranging debate in private, supported by collective responsibility in public.
5.16 From this perspective, some civil servants argued that the premature disclosure of official documents could have deleterious effects on the conduct and working of government. It might, for instance, reveal disagreements between ministers, and thus undermine the important principle of collective responsibility; or it might reduce the candour essential to the trusting relationships between ministers and officials (a candour already under threat because of recent disclosures in the memoirs of some civil servants, published in defiance of the Radcliffe rules). Others urged that it might limit the range of advice given to ministers, which would lead to less well informed and more guarded decision-making; and it could mean the disclosure of the names of civil servants who were still employed in government, exposing them, rather than ministers, to unfair and inappropriate public criticism. This, some contended, could undermine the service’s reputation for impartiality, especially if civil servants seemed too closely identified with a particular policy or party.
5.17 We were told by one witness that the working of FoI has already had a ‘chilling effect’ on record-keeping: that policy documents and minutes of meetings are written less candidly, less controversially and less fully, because of the fear of earlier disclosure. This concern was also expressed in another way, namely that a significant reduction in the 30 year rule, which would further intensify anxieties about premature disclosure, could lead to an increase in the practice of what is termed ‘sofa government’, a vague and shorthand phrase for the practice whereby proper processes are not always followed when important decisions are taken informally. Regrettable aspects of ‘sofa government’ are held to include: the lack of provision of full documentation, with sufficient notice, so that discussion is adequately informed; the absence of appropriate officials and ministers at meetings to argue the issues with authority; the failure to keep full records and accurate minutes of such meetings; and the acceptance of decisions taken in this way with no real debate or serious discussion. 5.18 According to some of the civil servants to whom we spoke, the result of the greater openness brought about by FoI (which would be further reinforced by a major reduction in the 30 year rule) has been paradoxical yet also predictable. As the demand for earlier disclosure of official records intensifies, with the intention that more may be known, and sooner, about how government operates, the detail and accuracy of that documentation can correspondingly diminish. This, in turn, means that government functions less well, and that the public are no better informed.
5.19 Some civil servants also expressed particular concerns about the premature release of certain categories of especially sensitive material under the FoI Act. The Foreign Office stated that a reduction in the 30 year rule could mean that the UK would “risk releasing documents that are still sensitive and/or considered confidential by other states or international organisations”; the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform said they would have “real concerns with commercially sensitive information, which would be placed in the public domain earlier than is currently the case”; the Northern Ireland Office felt it was important that earlier release should not “cause real damage to relationships and hamper the embedding of the devolution settlement”; and the Cabinet Office said that if ministers cannot confidently expect that their deliberations on policy will benefit from a high level of protection against future disclosure, they may well be reluctant to put forward dissenting and divergent views. We also took a great deal of evidence from departments about the operational implications of a reduction, much of which is available on our website.
5.20 This may suggest that senior civil servants are generally unsympathetic to FoI and oppose any reduction in the 30 year rule. But that would be a mistaken conclusion. Most of them have come to terms with the new FoI regime, and some argue that the prospect of early scrutiny concentrates the mandarin mind, and thus produces better argued papers and fuller record-keeping. And while they are clearly concerned about the risks associated with the premature disclosure of official documents, most civil servants currently in post accepted that in the present climate of opinion, the 30 year rule should be and could be reduced.
FORMER MINISTERS AND PARLIAMENTARIANS
5.21 Of all those from whom we took evidence, MPs, peers and former ministers expressed the most wide-ranging set of views. A minority were cautious about the prospect of earlier disclosure. While accepting the general benefits of openness, they believed it essential that the confidentiality necessary to the conduct of official business should not be undermined by excessive pressure for disclosure, which could lead to a deterioration in standards of record-keeping, to more informal and unaccountable government, and also erode the principle of collective responsibility. All three former Prime Ministers took this view, and believed the current rules to be largely satisfactory: not – as some might cynically suspect – because of the prospect of the record of their administrations being disclosed sooner rather than later, but because of serious concern for the governance of the country and the UK’s national interest. They also argued that it was not in the public interest for serving governments to be distracted by revelations about previous events that might re-ignite controversy.
5.22 Nevertheless, among most former ministers we found a general appetite for significant reduction of the 30 year rule, and some were actively impatient for the release of the government papers relating to their own time in office. They argued, as Harold Wilson had done four decades before, that the official record should be released when the politicians concerned were still alive and in a position to defend their conduct, with most saying that this could safely be done after ten or 15 years. They also felt that earlier release would demonstrate the high quality of advice that British ministers habitually receive from their officials, illustrating the thinking behind policy decisions and helping society to learn from the successes and failures of their own time in office. This would reassure the public that ministers considered issues seriously, and might help renew confidence in the working of government and trust in politicians.
5.23 Several former ministers said that there was a clear conflict between the provisions of the FoI Act and the continued existence of the 30 year rule. Lord Owen insisted that the Act had undermined the rule “quite considerably and beneficially”; Lord Falconer – who favoured the immediate release of most official papers – said that any fixed rule would be out of step with the Act’s principle of ‘presumed openness’; and Lord Fowler suggested that the Act had “probably knocked in the last nail in the [30 year rule’s] coffin”. Lord Hunt argued that civil servants had nothing to fear from earlier disclosure: they had “Rolls Royce minds” and should be confident that the high quality of the decision making process would be recognised by the public. On the issue of collective responsibility, some former ministers pointed out that much confidential information about Cabinet decisions was extensively leaked to the media at the time – often in an exaggerated form. They argued that it was better for the public to have the full story of events rather than to have to piece it together from partial releases, memoirs and leaks; and that highly confidential papers could still be withheld even if the 30 year rule was reduced.
5.24 We were further told that society had changed significantly since the 30 year rule was created, and that much greater openness was now expected. Landmark events and developments, such as the publication of the Crossman diaries, increased internet access and the FoI Act itself had all contributed to a new climate in which people were less deferential, wished to be able to hold their government to account, and expected to have access to the information that would enable them to do so. It was unnecessary that perceptions of secrecy, compounded by rumours and leaks, should breed public cynicism, because most of the files that normally remain confidential for 30 years could safely be released long before that point, setting the record straight and strangling half-truths and misrepresentations. Indeed, Tony Benn insisted that there should be no rule at all, and that disclosure of almost all official papers should be immediate.
CONCLUSION
5.25 As with the international comparisons we undertook in Chapter 3, it is not easy to generalise on the basis of the wide-ranging domestic evidence we have gathered and heard: in part because it is not clear what relative weight should be given to each of the different constituencies who gave us their views; in part because there were – with the exception of the media – real and significant differences of opinion within each constituency as well as between them. Nevertheless, it seems important to attempt a summary.
5.26 In the case of the general public, opinion is varied but shows an overwhelming desire for a very significant reduction of the 30 year rule to less than 15 years. Our written and oral evidence shows a preference for a reduction of between 20 and 15 years, with small groups in favour of shorter or longer periods. The media advocated bringing the rule down to 10 or 15 years; historians and civil servants expressed opinions ranging from 15 to 30 years; and former ministers and Parliamentarians expressed the broadest spectrum of opinion, from scrapping the rule entirely to maintaining it at 30 years, but with the majority in favour of significant reduction. Indeed, it would be fair to say that ‘significant reduction’ was the most widely-expressed opinion. 6
OUR ASSESSMENT
6.1 The majority of evidence we have received and heard strengthens our preliminary view that the maintenance of the present 30 year rule is anachronistic and unsustainable. Indeed the case for reduction is very powerful: internationally and domestically, that is the direction in which both government practice and public expectation are moving; the passing of the Freedom of Information [FoI] Act has decisively and irreversibly enhanced the right of the public to have greater access to much more recent official information; and a rule that allows records to remain closed for 30 years, unless access is requested under FoI, thus appears to be an unenforceable relic from a different age.
6.2 But while it seems generally agreed that there ought to be some reduction in the 30 year rule, we have received many different opinions as to what, precisely, that reduction should be. Accordingly, and before making our own recommendations, we take this opportunity to assess the views and concerns of our witnesses, and to comment on them.
IMMEDIATE DISCLOSURE
6.3 A few witnesses advocated a policy of ‘total openness’: the systematic release of official documents shortly after their creation. We are un-persuaded by these arguments. Such a practice would be contrary to that of most democratic nations similar to our own, and it might seriously damage our international standing and the conduct of international relations. We further believe it would lead to reduced frankness between ministers and civil servants, and that it would make it impossible to sustain the important practice of collective cabinet responsibility. There is also very little evidence that what has been described as ‘conservatory government’ or ‘televised Cabinet’ commands support, even among the general public.
6.4 Some other witnesses, while not wishing to go this far, proposed the outright abolition of the 30 year rule, and urged that there should be no ‘rule’ at all. All official records would be released as soon as it was safe and appropriate to do so, consistent with satisfying the exemptions in the FoI Act. Such a policy, they argue, would be the only way of putting into practice the FoI’s principle of ‘presumed openness’. However, no practical way of managing this laborious, record-by-record approach has been explained to us; and there is a real risk that without a specified time as a stimulus to force release, many documents might never be put in the public domain at all. This is rightly seen as undesirable, and reinforces the continuing need for a ‘rule’ of some definite duration.
PREMATURE DISCLOSURE
6.5 We heard extensive evidence that the consequences of releasing official records too soon could be deleterious in many ways. In regard to the arguments about ‘safe space’, we accept that freedom for confidential debate is essential for trusting relations between ministers and civil servants, and for collective cabinet responsibility; but we believe that its connection with any reasonable and responsible reduction in the 30 year rule is unproven. Several witnesses informed us that the fear of immediate leaks to the media, or of disclosure in response to a request made under FoI within a few years (while ministers and civil servants are probably still in office) was a much more likely reason for cautious discussions and bland record-keeping. So while it may be true that record-keeping has changed as a result of such immediate concerns, we believe it would not change further because of a reduction of the 30 year rule to (say) 15 or 20 years.
6.6 As to the alleged ‘chilling effect’, opinion was divided on whether it exists or is significant, but again, we found no evidence that it is related to the 30 year rule rather than to FoI in general. It was argued by some of our witnesses that the prospect of early FoI disclosure contributes to ensuring that advice is thorough and rigorous. Others contend that the necessity of maintaining an audit trail for FoI purposes has had some effect in raising the standard of record-keeping. We also believe that the work of civil servants is not constrained by anxieties about what future historians may think. Their task is to give the best possible advice to ministers, and our view is that they do not withhold such advice for fear of what people may say in (for example) 15 or 20 years’ time. Now, as in the past, government primarily generates records to serve its current operational needs.
6.7 In the case of concerns regarding ‘sofa government’, and as with the arguments advanced vis a vis ‘safe space’ and ‘the chilling effect’, we could find no credible link between this alleged practice and the existence (or potential modification) of the 30 year rule. We accept that ‘sofa government’ may have occurred at certain times in twentieth-century British history – indeed, long before FoI and the introduction of the 30 year rule; but we believe that it is more likely to be a reflection of leadership style and political circumstances than to be motivated by any concern regarding the timing of the future disclosure of official documents.
CIVIL SERVANTS’ CAREERS
6.8 We accept that any significant reduction in the 30 year rule would mean that civil servants still in post might find their names in the public domain. But we do not consider this a sufficient justification for maintaining the 30 year rule. We recognise that appropriate consideration would need to be shown in particularly sensitive cases, but in the changed climate of opinion and expectation in which we now live, senior civil servants must accept the possibility of public exposure and accommodate themselves to it. Indeed, we have found some evidence that this is what many of them are already doing.
6.9 We further believe that ministers do understand clearly that civil servants work neutrally for them, regardless of their own party affiliation, and we note that many of today’s civil servants were in post during the time of the previous Conservative government without this having affected their careers and work under the present Labour administration. Indeed, it may well be that, if more official records were released earlier, public recognition of the importance of the political neutrality of the civil service would be enhanced rather than diminished.
POLITICIANS’ CAREERS
6.10 It was also put to us that the likely impact of possible reduction to 15 or 20 years would be harmful to long-serving ministers, who could be distracted from their current business by routine publication, while they are still in office, of official documents relating to their earlier careers. Yet in reality, such scrutiny was always extremely unlikely even under the 30 year rule, and it is even less likely today than it was when the rule was created: average ministerial career spans have steadily reduced over the last 60 years, and markedly so in the case of senior Cabinet ministers. Figure 6.1 shows that it is now exceptionally rare for a minister to be still in office after 20 or even 15 years, so it would be very unlikely for him or her to be affected by reduction of the 30 year rule to these levels. Moreover, any serving minister, however long or short his or her time in office, can be subject to requests made under FoI. Neither the 30 year rule, nor any reduction to it, would provide any safeguard from such requests being made, as the disclosure of documents relating to the Iraq war has shown.
THE LENGTH OF ADMINISTRATIONS
While in recent times the span of individual ministerial careers has been getting shorter, the length of single-party administrations has been getting longer: the Conservatives under Thatcher and Major were in power from 1979 to 1997, and Labour under Blair and Brown has been in office ever since. Clearly, a significant reduction in the 30 year rule would have had implications in the first of these cases: had a 15 year rule, for example, applied in the 1990s, John Major’s hard-pressed government would have been additionally obliged to defend the Thatcher administration of 1979-82 from critics who would have been well armed with material derived from the official records of that time.
On the other hand, no individual prime ministerial span in recent times has reached 15 years, let alone 20, so the likelihood of a premier having to defend his (or her) record when official documents were made available under a 15 or 20 year rule seems remote. And as with ministers, so with prime ministers: they can be subject at any time to requests that are made by the public under FoI. We also note that the length of these recent administrations is historically very rare, with the only previous examples dating back to the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.
OTHER CONCERNS
Several departments expressed particular anxieties about the consequences of a significant reduction in the 30 year rule. The Foreign Office was concerned that premature disclosure would damage Britain’s international standing. But as we have described in Chapter Three, there is already a general international trend towards greater official openness; and in the future as in the past, particularly sensitive diplomatic documents would be covered by the exemptions for this class of information that are sanctioned by FoI17.
6.15 We also heard from some departments who feared that earlier disclosure of the details of long-term government contracts could prejudice future negotiations.18 Against this we had to balance the clear public interest to know more about such arrangements, which involve the expenditure of considerable amounts of taxpayers’ money. And it bears repeating that a long-term FoI exemption can be applied to particularly sensitive papers.
6.16 We also note academic anxieties about the likely impact of a reduction in the 30 year rule on record-keeping functions and on the retention and destruction of documents; but we believe that such changes are more likely as a result of FoI than of any future reduction in the 30 year rule.
6.17 We further recognise that if the date of general release were made less than 30 years, a greater proportion of documents will be withheld on the grounds of sensitivity. The National Archives estimated that a reduction to 20 years would result in a probable increase from 5% of records transferred being withheld to perhaps 10%. But this would still represent a major gain in the public disclosure of official documents, and the 10% withheld would in any case be subject to FoI applications and the appeals process.
CONCLUSION
6.18 In the light of these reflections, our conclusions are as follows. The drawbacks of instant or premature disclosure of official records, both in terms of collective responsibility and effective government, and also in undermining the orderly and scheduled transfer of official records to The National Archives, mean that there must be some rule. But we do not believe that earlier general access, which would be made possible by a significant reduction in the 30 year rule, would be detrimental to good government. On the contrary, we consider it to be desirable in the public interest.
6.19 Accordingly, we conclude that the 30 year rule is no longer appropriate in the current climate of public opinion and expectation, and with a functioning FoI Act which allows access to many official records at much earlier dates.
6.20 We now turn to consider what would be an appropriate reduction in the 30 year rule, and we shall then address both the logistics and the costs of implementing our recommendations.
______________________________________________________________________
17 Sections 27.1 and 27.2 of the Freedom of Information Act: international relations (prejudice) and international relations (confidence). 18 The exemption covering ‘commercial interests’ (section 43.2 of the FoI Act), currently expires at 30 years and would be affected by any reduction of the 30 year rule. 7
OUR RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 In the preceding chapters, we have set out the evidence for and against reduction in the 30 year rule that we have accumulated and acquired during an extensive process of consultation. We have thoroughly explored and evaluated it, and we have also taken account of the practices in other countries. In the light of such considerations, we conclude that a substantial reduction in the present 30 year rule would strike a more appropriate balance between effective government and open government.
A CHANGE IN THE RULE
7.2 As we explained at the end of Chapter Five, the weight of our evidence pointed overwhelmingly to a significant reduction from 30 years, to what we sense is a figure somewhere between 20 and 15 years. The choice between those two numbers is not so clear cut and we have considered it with great care.
7.3 To be sure, the arguments which point to a substantial reduction are strong and persuasive. We noted particularly the change in public expectations since we moved to the 30 year rule around four decades ago, the trend towards greater openness and accountability in many other areas of British life since then, the significant impact of Freedom of Information [FoI] legislation, and the discernible international moves towards greater official transparency and public access. All this points to a shorter rather a longer period for a new rule.
7.4 On the other hand, effective government is by definition in the public interest, and our system vitally depends on the collective responsibility of ministers and a neutral but fully engaged civil service. We noted particularly that it is undesirable for serving ministers to be distracted from their current responsibilities by re-fighting old battles because the relevant papers have just been released and that the case for the anonymity of senior civil servants to be protected is, if anything, strengthened as they assume heavy and potentially controversial responsibilities at an earlier stage and as they (increasingly) work beyond the retirement age of 60.
7.5 In attaching appropriate importance to all these matters, we recognise that neither the case for 15 years nor the case for 20 years is beyond argument. It must be a matter of judgement how to strike the balance between these conflicting considerations, further influenced by our belief that we could make a small but significant contribution to strengthening a responsive and responsible democracy. In our own deliberations, the balance has eventually come down in favour of 15 years.
7.6 Accordingly, our most important recommendation is that the government should replace the current 30 year rule with a 15 year rule, regarding both the transfer of public records to The National Archives and other places of deposit, and the allowing of access to them. We further recommend that these changes should be effected by appropriate amendments to the Public Records Act and the FoI Act. IMPLEMENTATION
7.7 Our terms of reference also charged us with examining whether any categories of official information should have their release prioritised and accelerated. We have heard no evidence that varying the timetable according to category is desirable or practicable; in fact numerous witnesses commented on the importance of continuing to release a year’s papers all together, to provide the fullest possible picture. We therefore recommend no change to the current practice.
7.8 We have previously noted that some official records are currently retained by their originating departments beyond 30 years, and that, in exceptional cases, other documents are transferred to The National Archives at that time, but remain closed – including in some cases communications with the royal household. The retention of records is subject to the consent of the Lord Chancellor, who is advised by his Advisory Council on National Records and Archives. We recommend that this approval should continue to be required in such cases if the 15 year rule is now adopted.
7.9 We have also considered whether a 15 year rule should apply on a forward-only basis, or be fully retrospective. A ‘forward’ approach would mean that only official records created from the point of decision would be routinely opened after 15 years, while records already in existence would still be opened after 30 years. Alternatively, a retrospective application would mean that all official documents, regardless of when they were created, would be released after 15 years, so the backlog of records between 15 and 30 years old would need to be processed and released as quickly as possible in order for the new rule to be complied with.
7.10 Retrospective application could be seen as unfair to the original authors of official documents, who at the time of writing expected their work to remain confidential for 30 years. But there are two important precedents in favour of such a change: both the reduction of the 50 year rule to the 30 year rule and the implementation of the FoI Act were fully retrospective, and on each occasion ministers and the civil service adapted accordingly and without significant difficulty. Moreover, there is no evidence of likely damage to the national interest from a retrospective 15 year rule that would not be prevented by long-term exemptions. We therefore recommend that the 15 year rule should be applied fully retrospectively.
PHASING-IN
7.11 A critical element of the practicability of a reduction is phasing-in: namely how rapidly the retrospectively-applied 15 year rule should be implemented. Many of those in favour of a significant reduction have argued for a gradual phasing-in so as to make the task both easier to pay for and to achieve. They urge that declaring the additional 15 years of documents to be immediately open would throw record-creating departments into a state of chaos which would serve historians and the public less well than a delay while records were processed in an orderly fashion. We accept these arguments in favour of an extended phasing-in period. But just how long ought that period to be?
7.12 We have received suggestions varying from three to 15 years as being the appropriate time span. The case for a shorter phasing-in period is that the records would be released as early as possible in the public interest, that it would give the civil service a greater incentive to get started in good time to complete the work, and thus to clear any paper backlogs. But we are more concerned that the backlog should be dealt with properly than quickly, and we fear that excessive haste might result in poor quality of work and rushed decisions. We further believe that anxieties about getting the process started would be mitigated by the drawing up of a strict annual timetable. 7.13 We are also well aware that many departments are experiencing serious budget pressures, in some cases a 5% year-on-year reduction in their operating costs. At the same time, their records units are coping with major challenges such as administrative savings, digital records and changes mandated by emerging government guidelines on information-handling. Under these circumstances, we acknowledge that it would be counter-productive – and simply unrealistic – to ask departments to introduce a 15 year rule too soon.
7.14 Beyond these considerations, the main argument for a longer period is that it increases the practicability of a reduction, lessening both the number of additional records that must be processed every year and also the other tasks that may have to be cancelled or postponed to enable such a reduction to be achieved.
7.15 On balance we favour a longer-term approach, minimising the additional work that needs to be done every year and making retrospective application gradual rather than sudden. A further benefit would be that civil servants and ministers who might feel that an immediate reduction to 15 years would be unfair (because they had expected their papers to remain confidential for 30 years) will find the release accelerated at only a gradual rate.
7.16 We therefore recommend that the transition to a 15 year rule be managed by releasing one additional year’s worth of records every year until the backlog has been processed.
7.17 Assuming a decision to begin implementation in 2010, the transition to operating the 15 year rule will be completed by the end of 2024, enabling departments to return to a ‘one year at a time’ approach from 2025 (see Figure 7.1).
Figure 7.1: Illustrative timetable assuming implementation were to begin in 2010
| Date of creation of records | When these records should be released | |-----------------------------|--------------------------------------| | 1978 | 2009 | | 1979 & 1980 | 2010 | | 1981 & 1982 | 2011 | | 1983 & 1984 | 2012 | | 1985 & 1986 | 2013 | | 1987 & 1988 | 2014 | | 1989 & 1990 | 2015 | | 1991 & 1992 | 2016 | | 1993 & 1994 | 2017 | | 1995 & 1996 | 2018 | | 1997 & 1998 | 2019 | | 1999 & 2000 | 2020 | | 2001 & 2002 | 2021 | | 2003 & 2004 | 2022 | | 2005 & 2006 | 2023 | | 2007 & 2008 | 2024 | | 2009 | 2025 | COSTS
7.18 If these recommendations are accepted, then all bodies covered by the Public Records Act will need to process an additional 15 years’ worth of paper records, in addition to their normal annual output, by the end of 2024. This will have significant cost implications.
7.19 Based on information provided to us by central government departments, moving to a 15 year rule will cost approximately £75 million. The public benefits of increased access and understanding are clear and we do not believe that this figure overturns the case for a reduction. When applied over a 15 year period, the annual cost will be £5 million, which might usefully be compared to the £25 million yearly cost of operating the FoI system as a whole.
7.20 We would not wish to see the government implement short-term efficiency savings in records management in order to achieve reduction to a 15 year rule. Equally we would not wish to encourage more casual document appraisal, which might result in the inadvertent release of records damaging to public or individual interests; in the lowering of cataloguing standards; or in resources being diverted from the vital work of ensuring the survival of digital records.
7.21 It seems unlikely that the government will consider providing additional funding for reduction of the 30 year rule within the current Comprehensive Spending Review cycle, which will come to an end in March 2011. For the following cycle, however, we would urge the government to recognise the fundamental importance of information management, described later in our report, and to disavow the traditional treatment of it as an administrative area that can be operated on perpetually smaller and smaller budgets.
7.22 We recommend that the government make adequate additional provision in the 2011-14 and subsequent Comprehensive Spending Reviews for all records-related activities during the remainder of the implementation period, including work on digital records and FoI request handling.
7.23 With a programme of work spread over 15 years across the whole of government, there is also a risk that implementation will be uneven between years and between departments, and this will further increase if additional resources are not made available.
7.24 In order to minimise such a risk we recommend that a single central authority is given responsibility for monitoring and reporting on progress.
7.25 The recommendation at paragraph 7.6 applies only to government records. However, we have considered whether it is appropriate to recommend earlier access to other records also, for example those of local authorities that are not covered by the Public Records Act. A two-tier system that applies one access rule to government records and another to the records of the wider FoI community seems undesirable. Accordingly, we recommend that the amendments to the FoI Act referred to at 7.6 should apply to all information covered by the Act.
______________________________________________________________________
19 This figure excludes costs for non-central government bodies, for example local authorities, that will need to comply with one or both Acts; although such costs should be considerably lower given the nature of their records. It also excludes storage savings arising from the government’s overall holdings being smaller, which are real but not material. For further details see Appendix A.
20 As estimated in 2006: see http://www.foi.gov.uk/reference/foi-independent-review.pdf CONCLUSION
7.26 Such are our conclusions regarding the 30 year rule, and our recommendations as to its reduction and how that might be achieved. We turn now to the other relevant matters that we were asked to consider under our terms of reference. 8
OTHER RELEVANT ISSUES
8.1 The primary task of this review – to look at the 30 year rule in the light of the Freedom of Information [FoI] Act and other considerations – has been discharged in the recommendations we have made in the previous chapter; but we were also asked to identify ‘any other issues’ that might be relevant to ‘modernising the existing system’ of government record-keeping.
8.2 Accordingly, we now raise some additional matters that have been drawn to our attention in the course of our enquiries, and we also offer recommendations as to how they might be investigated and addressed. They range from precise and specific issues to broad and general considerations, and are grouped under the following headings: the civil service; sensitive categories of information; special advisers; memoirs; proactive publication; the digital challenge; information overload; and local government.
THE CIVIL SERVICE
8.3 Notwithstanding the form in which they are made and preserved, most records of central government are in practice generated by civil servants. Yet we have heard conflicting views about the completeness with which such records have been kept in recent times, and we were surprised to discover that there is no duty to keep such records specified in the current Civil Service Code. Although the Code is principally concerned with values, we believe that record-keeping is as much an issue of ethics as it is of evidence. Civil servants have a moral as well as a professional obligation to keep precise and comprehensive records, and we urge that they should be made aware of how important this is.
8.4 We recommend that the government revisit the Civil Service Code to see whether it needs an amendment to include an explicit injunction to keep full, accurate and impartial records of government business.
8.5 If our recommendations are accepted, and official records become available after 15 years, this means that named civil servants, who are in no position to defend themselves from public criticism, and who often have little choice about the work they are called upon to undertake, might have their careers prejudiced if it were thought that they were very closely identified with a particular minister, or if they happened to be involved in a particularly controversial matter.
8.6 Accordingly, we recommend the use, wherever possible, of redaction of official documents, as they are made publicly available, to protect the identity of civil servants. SENSITIVE CATEGORIES OF INFORMATION
8.7 As we noted in Chapter Five, there are genuine concerns among some ministers and civil servants about the early release of particularly sensitive types of papers. Given that we are recommending a substantial reduction to the 30 year rule, we believe that the government may wish to look again at the exemptions set out in the FoI Act.
8.8 We therefore recommend that, in parallel with the adoption of a 15 year rule, the government, in consultation with interested parties, may wish to consider whether there is a case for enhanced protection of such categories of information.
SPECIAL ADVISERS
8.9 During the course of our inquiries, we have frequently been struck by the number of people who think either that special advisers (who are temporary civil servants) are lackadaisical in their own record-keeping, or that their non-party-political papers are exempt from the Public Records Act and the FoI Act, or both. We are not sure that these fears are justified, but we are certain that the position needs to be clarified.
8.10 We recommend that the government confirm that special advisers’ non-political records are not exempt from the Public Records Act and the FoI Act; that as temporary civil servants they, too, are under a duty to keep a full record of their deeds and doings; and that any misunderstanding about these matters on the part of ministers, departments or special advisers is removed.
MEMOIRS
8.11 The present position concerning the publication of memoirs by former ministers, by civil servants and by special advisers, as defined in the Radcliffe rules, is both unclear and unsatisfactory. The rules themselves are insufficiently specific, they have been increasingly flouted in recent years, there is no effective mechanism for enforcing them, and it is not even clear whether there should be – or whether there could be – such a mechanism. Moreover, Radcliffe’s 15 year rule was drawn up before the FoI Act was passed.
8.12 We recommend that the government commission an independent review of the Radcliffe system, with the aim of overhauling and updating it in the light of the FoI Act and of our principal recommendations concerning a reduction in the 30 year rule.
PROACTIVE PUBLICATION
8.13 In the changed climate of opinion and expectations regarding official records, to which we have already drawn attention, the current government and its predecessor have urged (and implemented) a more proactive approach, wherever possible, to the early release of such documents. This brings such benefits of openness as increased understanding of how decisions are made and implemented by government, it makes unnecessary some FoI requests, and it lessens the significance of any time-specific ‘rule’ as the point at which most government records enter in the public domain. Already, under FoI, many public bodies are required to maintain such a publication scheme, listing classes of documents that they regularly make public.
8.14 We applaud this practice of proactive release by government, and recommend that it should be made more widespread, so that, wherever possible, records should be put into the public domain as early as their sensitivity permits.
21 See para 5.19. THE DIGITAL CHALLENGE
8.15 Our recommendations for amending the 30 year rule will prove meaningless if the official records to which such a modified rule would be applied do not themselves survive. In the course of conducting this review, we have discovered that this is a real concern and pressing problem: not only from the deficiencies of current record-keeping practices, but also (and more importantly) from the long-term vulnerability of the digital records now produced, by all governments, and by businesses, organisations and institutions around the world, and additionally from the challenging complexity of managing them.
8.16 The recent explosion in digital records resulting from the universal adoption of email and websites as the principal means of government communication means that conventional paper-based procedures of preservation are no longer suited or appropriate. Unlike paper, digital records are subject to rapid obsolescence rather than slow decay, and they have a natural life which may be as little as five years. The oldest digital records that have been permanently preserved by the government date from 1992, which means they are 16 years old and thus at serious risk. Some important digital records are known to have been lost already, not intentionally but because of software that is no longer supported, corrupted storage media or lack of preservation systems.
8.17 But there are other issues involved in managing digital records. They include: their ‘easy come easy go’ nature (especially email); problems of authentication; the chaotic situation of data ‘litter’ with no common approach to management; the sheer volume of data that is created; and finally its variety, encompassing databases, emails, presentations, websites and video as well as conventional ‘papers’.
8.18 The pace of change is also a problem. New applications, recently including desktop video and internet-based telephone services, are typically developed and launched commercially before any thought is given to how the records they create can be captured and preserved.
8.19 The evidence we have heard is that ten years is probably the latest point by which digital records should be reviewed by departments and agencies and, if there are reasons to preserve them, transferred to a stable storage environment. If this is not done, there is a real danger that the official record may not survive, and it is difficult to overstate just how disastrous this would be.
8.20 We recommend that as a matter of urgency the government should review its strategy in this area, and that it should re-assess the system of review of digital records so as to ensure that they are in a sustainable storage environment by the time they are ten years old.
INFORMATION OVERLOAD
8.21 In a world where all government business is now conducted electronically, there is not only the risk that essential records will not survive, but also the simultaneous danger of vast amounts of ephemeral information paralysing the system. For example, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport told us that it took just one year for the documentation they hold about the 2012 Olympics to outgrow their Listed Buildings database, which had been compiled over 60 years. Multiplied across government and the public sector, this exponential increase in electronically-available and sustained information may have the paradoxical effect of reducing the knowledge that can be usefully gleaned from it: if files are not created and preserved so as to be searchable, they simply disappear into this ‘digital landfill’, which is of no use either to serving governments or future historians. 8.22 We know that some government departments are moving to a system of pre-determining the preservation status of documents at the time of their creation, offering the possibility of automatic deletion or transfer to The National Archives at a planned and specific time. This seems a helpful – indeed, essential – way of managing the overall system.
8.23 We recommend that electronic record capture should be an integral part of the IT infrastructure of government, and not a ‘bolt-on’ activity. Work on creating an IT strategy to ensure that records are automatically kept needs to be accelerated.
LOCAL GOVERNMENT
8.24 For central government, this is a massive challenge and complication, but the situation is worse in local government, where there is even more emphatic evidence that it is unequipped to cope. The government has initiated some important projects, co-ordinated by The National Archives and involving many central departments; but it is clear that the threat posed by an inadequate response to digital records is not as well understood at the highest levels as its importance merits. We believe that it deserves the highest possible priority, including regular consideration by senior decision-makers alongside normal business and financial planning.
8.25 We recommend that the appropriate central government authority does more to monitor and prompt continuing work on the preservation of electronic records that are generated by local government.
CONCLUSION
8.26 Such are our more general observations and recommendations, in the light of the evidence that has been brought to our attention during the course of our inquiry. From one perspective, we have addressed a very specific matter: the continued or diminished viability of the 30 year rule, in the light of the FoI Act and the broader shifts in public expectation and outlook of which that Act is but one example and illustration. From another, we have considered the wider challenges to government record-keeping in an age which, in terms of technology, is very different from any that has gone before.
8.27 Throughout our inquiry, we have constantly borne in mind that official records, whether set down on paper or generated electronically, are the most vital component of our national memory, and are thus essential to our continued national well-being. Their preservation, for access and use by the public, is of critical importance for the proper working of government and for a well-informed people, and we believe that our recommendations, if accepted and implemented, will be in the public interest, and will thereby help safeguard freedom and strengthen democracy.
### TABLE OF RECOMMENDATIONS
| Recommendation | Description | |----------------|-------------| | 7.6 | We recommend that the government should replace the current 30 year rule with a 15 year rule, regarding both the transfer of public records to The National Archives and other places of deposit, and the allowing of access to them. We further recommend that these changes should be effected by appropriate amendments to the Public Records Act and the Freedom of Information [FoI] Act. | | 7.7 | Our terms of reference charged us with examining whether any categories of official information should have their release prioritised and accelerated. We have heard no evidence that varying the timetable according to category is desirable or practicable, and recommend no change to the current practice. | | 7.8 | We recommend that the requirement for departments to seek the approval of the Lord Chancellor, acting on the advice of his Advisory Council on National Records & Archives, for the retention of records, should remain in place. | | 7.10 | We recommend that the 15 year rule should be applied fully retrospectively. | | 7.16 | We recommend that the transition to a 15 year rule be managed by releasing one additional year's worth of records every year until the backlog has been processed. | | 7.22 | We recommend that the government make adequate additional provision in the 2011-14 and subsequent Comprehensive Spending Review for all records-related activities during the remainder of the implementation period, including work on digital records and FoI request handling. | | 7.24 | In order to minimise the risk that implementation will be uneven between years and between departments we recommend that a single central authority is given responsibility for monitoring and reporting on progress. | | 7.25 | We recommend that the amendments to the FoI Act referred to at 7.6 should apply to all information covered by the FoI Act. | | 8.4 | We recommend that the government revisit the Civil Service Code to see whether it needs an amendment to include an explicit injunction to keep full, accurate and impartial records of government business. | | 8.6 | We recommend the use, wherever possible, of redaction of official documents, as they are made publicly available, to protect the identity of civil servants. | | 8.8 | We recommend that, in parallel with the adoption of a 15 year rule, the government, in consultation with interested parties, may wish to consider whether there is a case for enhanced protection of certain categories of information. | | 8.10 | We recommend that the government confirm that special advisers' non-political records are not exempt from the Public Records Act and the FoI Act; that as temporary civil servants they, too, are under a duty to keep a full record of their deeds and doings; and that any misunderstanding about the matters on the part of minister, departments or special advisers is removed. | | 8.12 | We recommend that the government commission an independent review of the Radcliffe system, with the aim of overhauling and updating it in the light of the FoI Act and of our principal recommendations concerning a reduction in the 30 year rule. | | 8.14 | We applaud the practice of proactive release by government, and recommend that it should be made more widespread, so that, wherever possible, records should be put into the public domain as early as their sensitivity permits. | | 8.20 | We recommend that as a matter of urgency the government should review its strategy for digital records, and that it should re-assess the system of review of them so as to ensure that they are in a sustainable storage environment by the time they are ten years old. | | 8.23 | We recommend that electronic record capture should be an integral part of the IT infrastructure of government, and not a ‘bolt-on’ activity. Work on creating an IT strategy to ensure that records are automatically kept needs to be accelerated. | | 8.25 | We recommend that the appropriate central government authority does more to monitor and prompt continuing work on the preservation of electronic records that are generated by local government. | APPENDIX A: COST ESTIMATES
1. To help us understand the likely cost of reducing the 30 year rule, we asked central government departments to supply us with an estimate of the cost of transition to a 20 year rule; i.e. the additional cost of processing an extra ten years’ worth of records on top of their normal business. Twenty years was chosen as a convenient benchmark. Departments were asked to include the costs likely to be incurred by their sponsored agencies.
2. Because every department operates differently, it was not always possible to compare the figures directly. For example, some departments gave the cost as a single monetary amount, while others provided a calculation of the number of records they thought might have to be processed and the number of additional staff they might require. We therefore had to make some assumptions about (for example) average salaries and numbers of files processed per head annually. Departments also used varying assumptions about the length of time they would have to complete the process, although in theory the total cost (before inflation) should be the same regardless of the time taken.
3. Although we heard from some agencies sponsored by central departments, we believe that there will be other bodies from whom we did not hear that would incur costs if a 20 year rule were introduced.
4. We adjusted the departments’ estimates only so far as was necessary to produce an overall total; and we included a significant contingency in our total estimate.
5. The figures received from each department are laid out in Table A.
6. Based on these figures, we estimate that the cost of moving to a 15 year rule is £75 million. Although we have not investigated the costs of transition outside central government, we believe that our contingency of £10 million would be sufficient to complete the transition to a 15 year rule. Table A: Cost estimates received from government departments
| Department or agency | Estimated cost of transition to 20-year rule | |-----------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------| | Atomic Weapons Establishment | £2,028,000 | | Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform | £1,234,590 | | Cabinet Office | £2,250,000 | | Communities and Local Government/Transport | £2,100,000 | | Department for Children, Schools and Families | £118,125 | | Department for Culture, Media and Sport | £135,000 | | Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs | £1,710,000 | | Department for International Development | £210,000 | | Department for Work and Pensions | £620,760 | | Foreign Office | £5,000,000 | | HM Treasury | £3,933,628 | | Home Office | £4,260,618 | | Ministry of Defence | £11,841,200 | | Ministry of Justice | £535,714 | | Northern Ireland Office | £1,800,000 | | The National Archives | £2,500,000 | | (Contingency) | £10,000,000 | | **Total** | **£50,277,635** | APPENDIX B: LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS TO THE WORK OF THE REVIEW
Witnesses at oral evidence sessions Alex Allan\* David Bell\* Sir Brian Bender\* Rt Hon Tony Benn Rt Hon David Blunkett MP Rt Hon Lord Butler of Brockwell Natalie Ceeney Rt Hon the Lord Falconer of Thoroton Rt Hon Lord Fowler David Hencke Rt Hon Lord Hunt of Wirral Bruce Jackson Sir Bill Jeffrey\* Sir Christopher Meyer Sir Gus O’Donnell\* Rt Hon Lord Owen Rt Hon Lord Tebbit Richard Thomas Lord Turnbull Rt Hon Jack Straw MP Steve Wood
CONTRIBUTORS OF WRITTEN EVIDENCE Professor Paul Addison Advisory Panel on Public Sector Information Ann Abraham, Parliamentary Ombudsman Association of Chief Archivists in Local Government Association of Chief Police Officers Association of Departmental Record Officers Professor Virginia Berridge Rt Hon Tony Blair\* British Academy Cabinet Office Rt Hon David Cameron MP\* Anthony Camp Rt Hon Kenneth Clarke MP Rt Hon Nick Clegg MP\* Churchill Archives Centre Clerks of the Houses of Parliament Professor Martin Daunton (on behalf of the Royal Historical Society) Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Department for Children, Schools and Families Department for Communities & Local Government Department for Culture, Media and Sport Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills Department for International Development Department for Transport Department for Work & Pensions Department of Health Professor David Edgerton First Division Association First Minister and Deputy First Minister of Northern Ireland Foreign & Commonwealth Office Friends of The National Archives Guild of One-Name Studies Professor Sir Brian Harrison Rt Hon Lord Hattersley Professor Peter Hennessy HM Treasury Home Office Institute of Historical Research, University of London ITN Joint Information Systems Committee Keeper of the Records of Scotland Lambeth Palace Library London Metropolitan Archives Lord Chancellor’s Advisory Council on National Records and Archives Lords Constitution Committee Lord Lester of Herne Hill as a member of the Information Rights User Group Professor Rodney Lowe Rt Hon Sir John Major\* Ministry of Defence Ministry of Justice Rt Hon Rhodri Morgan AM Professor Michael Moss Museums, Libraries & Archives Council National Council on Archives National Library of Wales Newspaper Publishers Association Newspaper Society Northern Ireland Office OFCOM Ordnance Survey Rt Hon the Lord Patten of Barnes Dr Hugh Pemberton Periodical Publishers Association Post Office Vehicle Club Press Association Public & Commercial Services Union Public Administration Select Committee Reuters Roads and Road Transport History Association Rt Hon Baroness Thatcher\* Richard Thomas Scottish Daily Newspaper Society Scottish Information Commissioner Scottish Records Advisory Council Dr Anthony Seldon Mark Thompson (on behalf of the BBC) Society of Archivists Society of Authors Society of Editors Society of Genealogists Society for the Social History of Medicine Professor Pat Thane The National Archives University College London School of Public Policy Constitution Unit Rt Hon Lord Wakeham Professor John Young
**EVIDENCE:**
Copies of all written and oral evidence can be found at
www.30yearrulereview.org.uk
- Evidence submitted in confidence
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0632-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 51,
"total-input-tokens": 98432,
"total-output-tokens": 28057,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
41,
1
],
[
41,
413,
2
],
[
413,
413,
3
],
[
413,
3602,
4
],
[
3602,
4887,
5
],
[
4887,
7662,
6
],
[
7662,
8627,
7
],
[
8627,
11723,
8
],
[
11723,
15697,
9
],
[
15697,
19360,
10
],
[
19360,
22972,
11
],
[
22972,
26594,
12
],
[
26594,
27258,
13
],
[
27258,
30226,
14
],
[
30226,
33727,
15
],
[
33727,
36910,
16
],
[
36910,
37424,
17
],
[
37424,
40537,
18
],
[
40537,
44218,
19
],
[
44218,
47348,
20
],
[
47348,
51044,
21
],
[
51044,
54142,
22
],
[
54142,
56277,
23
],
[
56277,
57618,
24
],
[
57618,
60444,
25
],
[
60444,
62864,
26
],
[
62864,
66938,
27
],
[
66938,
71199,
28
],
[
71199,
75290,
29
],
[
75290,
79143,
30
],
[
79143,
82415,
31
],
[
82415,
86322,
32
],
[
86322,
88204,
33
],
[
88204,
91060,
34
],
[
91060,
94017,
35
],
[
94017,
97848,
36
],
[
97848,
100987,
37
],
[
100987,
104428,
38
],
[
104428,
104677,
39
],
[
104677,
107170,
40
],
[
107170,
110420,
41
],
[
110420,
114087,
42
],
[
114087,
116747,
43
],
[
116747,
119824,
44
],
[
119824,
121051,
45
],
[
121051,
122935,
46
],
[
122935,
125158,
47
],
[
125158,
126025,
48
],
[
126025,
127411,
49
],
[
127411,
128468,
50
],
[
128468,
128468,
51
]
]
} |
a04be4b0b1cb4def8cf4ffff119e2ef0a9385681 | Supplementary Report on Economic Benefits
Our ref 40274/04/NG/SMH/CRO/DBu Date July 2015 To Peak District National Park Authority From Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners
Subject Economic Benefits Comparison: Foodstores within Riverside Business Park Regeneration and Bakewell Aldi Proposal
1.0 Introduction
1.1 This Supplementary Report concerns two proposals for foodstores within Bakewell. It provides an overview of the economic benefits of each, before undertaking a comparative analysis to judge which is likely to have the greatest overall economic benefits locally, for Bakewell and in the wider Peak District area.
2.0 Details of the Respective Proposals
2.1 The Peak Sub-Region Retail and Town Centre Study (2009) concludes that the town of Bakewell retains just over half (51%) of its main food shopping spend, whilst the only main foodstore provision in the area (a Co-Op) trades well above its company benchmark level. The trading performance of the Co-Op and the potential for claw-back of expenditure currently directed to destinations outside of the Bakewell area means that the development of a new foodstore in the town is unlikely to have any significant employment displacement impact on the existing town centre foodstore.
2.2 The 2009 Study notes that a lack of a mainstream foodstore and the extent of overtrading of the existing foodstore suggests that increasing the provision of foodstores within Bakewell would:
“deliver particular quantitative and qualitative benefits through enhancing market share performance and widening the choice of foodstore provision for local residents.”
2.3 A full planning application (Ref: NP/DDD/0115/0043) for a 1,254 sq. m gross Aldi foodstore on the site of the former Cintride Factory, Buxton Road, was submitted to the Peak District National Park Authority [PDNPA] on 29 January 2015. Officers reported the proposal to Committee on 15 May 2015 and whilst
______________________________________________________________________
1 Peak Sub-Region Retail and Town Centre Study (2009) paragraph 13.39 Members are minded to grant planning permission, permission is dependent upon the completion of a Section 106 Legal Agreement which is yet to be signed.
2.4 The proposals for Riverside Business Park [RBP] are for extensive redevelopment in phases. The first phase is hotel-led. The second phase (planning application reference Ref: NP/DDD/0415/0340 registered 30 April 2015) includes the proposed development of a 1,579 sq. m foodstore alongside units containing other commercial uses and office space. Planning permission is in granted, and a start is made on, a new bridged access over the adjacent river, from the RBP to the A6 Buxton Road. Completing the new bridged access will be required as a pre-condition to bringing the foodstore into use, with the new access only being achievable financially following realisation of the development value of the proposed foodstore.
3.0 Benefits of the Aldi Proposal
3.1 In its Planning Support Statement, Turley (for Aldi) states that the Aldi scheme will create 26 construction jobs. By applying the assumption that 1 FTE construction job in the East Midlands generates £60,320 GVA, NLP estimates that these construction jobs would create approximately £160,000 of additional GVA per annum during the construction period.
3.2 Once operational, the applicant states that the proposed Aldi foodstore will support 40 FTE jobs (made up of 30 full time employees and 20 part time employees). In the absence of information from the developer regarding the GVA impact of this potential employment, NLP estimates that once operational, the direct operational jobs associated with the Aldi foodstore could generate an additional £1.4m GVA annually.
3.3 Operational employment facilitates indirect or ‘induced’ employment in the form of spending on goods, services and supplies as part of the supply chain of a foodstore. Whilst no details of induced employment estimates have been made publically available, it is assumed that the Aldi scheme would benefit from similar employment multiplier effects as the proposed RBP retail foodstore development (that is, reflecting the characteristics of the proposed development, an induced employment rate of 1.21 for the local area and 1.38 for the wider region). Applying this multiplier allows NLP to estimate that the 40 FTE direct operational jobs which the proposed Aldi development would
______________________________________________________________________
2 Net Internal Area (NIA) – NIA is the usable area within a building measured to the face of the internal finish of perimeter or party walls ignoring skirting boards and taking each floor into account, including bulk store but excluding plant/service areas 3 Turley (2015) Planning Support Statement, 4.19. It is not stated whether this relates to total jobs, person years of employment or full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs. It has been assumed that the 26 jobs relate to 26 person years, or 2.6 FTEs. 4 Peak District National Park Authority: Application Reference NP/DDD/0115/0043 5 This is based upon East Midlands ‘GVA per FTE’ measure from Experian’s Regional Planning Service (RPS) December 2014, applied to the number of FTE jobs stated to result from the Aldi application 6 Based upon English Partnerships (2008) Additionality Guide Third Edition provide, could generate a further 8 FTE jobs in the local area and a further 15 FTE jobs in the wider region.
3.4 A Section 106 Agreement associated with the proposed development is intended to secure the purchase of a bus for a local community group(^7). The legal agreement has yet to be made publically available, so at this stage it is unclear under what arrangement the bus is to be provided. However, it is our understanding that the only contribution is for the capital payment towards the purchase of a bus itself. This is unusual, as in general where there is a reliance on new bus connectivity prior to granting planning permission (and in accordance with Regulation 123 of the CIL Regulations(^8)), it would be usual to ensure that there is provision for operational funding alongside a capital payment.
3.5 The Planning Support Statement also claims that the Aldi proposal will act as enabling development and provide a new serviced access which will unlock the remainder of the former Cintride Factory site for employment development. No further analysis is provided in the Statement of the likely economic benefits to arise from this. DCC Highways has expressly stated that the ability to achieve access, to any proposal for which an application for planning permission is submitted and which relies on the new Cintride access, will be considered on its own merits at the time of any application being submitted. It cannot therefore be said with any certainty that the proposed Aldi development will unlock development on the remainder of the Cintride factory site or what any future economic benefits of such development may be.
4.0 Benefits of the RBP Proposal
4.1 NLP’s Economic Benefits Assessment(^9) (2015) estimates that the foodstore element of the proposed RBP development would generate up to 68 person-years of employment during the construction stage of the development (which includes not just the foodstore but also other commercial and office units). The increase in GVA associated with these direct construction jobs equates to approximately £410,000 per annum during the period of the construction.
4.2 In addition to the employment associated with the construction of the foodstore (and other elements of the RBP application), the employment generated by the standalone foodstore, once operational, is estimated to total around 74 FTE direct jobs(^10), along with additional GVA equating to £2.6m per annum.
______________________________________________________________________
(^7) Peak District National Park (2015) 15 May 2015 Planning Committee Minutes, page 5 (^8) Regulation 123 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, concerning the further limitations on the use of planning obligations (^9) Nathaniel Lichfield & Partners (2015) Proposed Hotel-led (Full) and Employment/Retail-led (Outline) Development – Economic Benefits Assessment, page 12 (^10) This figure was calculated using a Net Internal Area (NIA) employment density, taken from HCA / OffPAT’s Employment Densities Guide 2nd Edition (2010), converted to a Gross External Area (GEA) density, and applied to the floorspace of the proposed retail foodstore 4.3 As the foodstore is but one element of the wider RBP development, the total operational jobs expected to be generated by the proposed development is 202 FTEs (including the 74 FTEs relating to the proposed foodstore). The additional GVA generated by the application as a whole is also significantly greater, totalling £15.3m per annum.(^{11})
4.4 As discussed above, operational employment facilitates further indirect and ‘induced’ employment in the form of spending on goods, services and supplies as part of the foodstore supply chain.
4.5 Using an induced employment multiplier which reflects the characteristics of the proposed RBP development, a further 42 FTE jobs would be supported in the local area and 76 FTE jobs within the wider region. It should be noted that this supply-chain employment relates to the entire development proposal, and that only a proportion of these jobs would be induced by the operation of the foodstore itself. It is estimated that the proposed foodstore in isolation would sustain around 15 FTE jobs locally, and 28 FTE jobs across the wider region.(^{12})
4.6 Alongside the retail element of the RBP application, other uses include commercial and office uses, whilst the mixed-use application is in itself just one part of an even wider planned redevelopment of the Riverside Business Park as a whole. Of particular note, without the provision of a new bridged access as part of the foodstore RBP application, the future expansion of businesses that currently occupy the remainder of the Business Park would be constrained.
4.7 Although not part of phase 1 or 2 of the proposed development directly, it is considered that there is potential for a further £2.5m of regeneration-related investment that would be facilitated by the improved access brought to the area by the new bridged access.
4.8 This would include the expansion of existing on-site businesses such as Pinelog, which currently employs around 65 (mainly full time) employees at the RBP. Pinelog has confirmed that it would be in a position to stay at the RBP and would expand and employ more workers if the bridge and access road were constructed. Similarly, Thornbridge Brewery currently employs around 35 members of staff at its site and has confirmed that it would aim to double its workforce, which in turn would facilitate a significant increase in production, if the development comes forward.(^{13})
(^{11}) As with the Aldi application GVA estimate, the additional GVA resulting from this development has been calculated by multiplying the FTE employment figures by the average GVA generated per FTE employee (differentiated by industrial category) within the East Midlands region, as calculated by Experian’s Regional Planning Service December 2014
(^{12}) The proportion of induced employment accounted for by the foodstore is calculated using the same induced employment multipliers as is the application as a whole - 1.21 for the local area and 1.38 for the wider region, based upon English Partnerships (2008) Additionality Guide Third Edition
(^{13}) Riverside Business Park Limited (2015) 4.9 The economic benefits of this wider development also align well with a broad range of local planning policy objectives. This is particularly the case through enhancing economic prosperity by creating employment opportunities for local people; increasing the share of higher value private sector employment in the district; re-using previously developed land; and bringing vacant buildings back into use.
5.0 Comparison of Both Applications
5.1 Table 1 compares the direct and indirect benefits of both retail foodstore applications.
Table 1: Comparative Benefits of Both Retail Foodstore Applications
| Aldi foodstore application (Ref: NP/DDD/0115/0043) | Riverside Business Park foodstore application (Ref: NP/DDD/0415/0340) | |---------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------| | • Construction employment of approximately 26 jobs, with associated GVA increase of approximately £160,000 per year of construction | • Up to 68 person-years of construction employment, with associated GVA increase of c.£410,000 per year of construction | | • Operational employment of approximately 40 FTE jobs (comprising 30 FT jobs and 20 PT jobs), with an associated GVA increase of approximately £1.4m annually | • Operational employment of up to 74 FTE jobs as part of the retail foodstore, with associated GVA increase of approximately £2.6m annually | | • Operational employment inducing a further 8 FTE jobs within local shops, services and other businesses, and a further 15 across the wider region | • In addition, between 100-130 operational FTE jobs(^{14}) resulting from units containing other commercial and office space, with associated GVA increase of approximately £12.7m annually | | • As part of a possible Section 106 agreement, the offer to fund the capital provision (but not necessarily the operational costs(^{15})) of a bus for the local Bakewell and Eyam community group | • Support a further 42 induced FTE jobs within local shops, services and other businesses and 76 within the wider region | | • | • A new bridged access over the river from Riverside Business Park onto the A6 | | | • The potential facilitation of up to £2.5m of further regeneration-related investment across the wider Riverside Business Park |
Source: Turley / Peak District National Park Planning Authority / RBP Limited / NLP analysis
5.2 The two proposed developments can be considered against one another in order to determine which provides the greater benefit to the wider area. Whilst the Aldi scheme is likely to generate employment, there is a significantly greater employment benefit from the RBP foodstore and related development.
(^{14}) Depending on the final use-class of the proposed development
(^{15}) Planning Committee 15(^{th}) May 2015 confirms that the Aldi foodstore applicants have agreed to fund the purchase of an additional bus to provide links from Bakewell and the surrounding area to the proposed foodstore through the provision of a legal agreement 5.3 Furthermore, if planning permission for the Aldi on Buxton Road is granted, then the viability of the proposed foodstore at the RBP would be placed in doubt. The access bridge is only viable if the foodstore remains a constituent part of the RBP second phase application. Without the foodstore, it is highly likely that the bridge and connecting access road would no longer be delivered, as no alternative uses at the RBP would be able to generate sufficient investment levels to offset these infrastructure costs. It follows that if the access road were no longer viable to deliver, it is probable that the proposed development would not proceed as currently envisaged.
5.4 A bridge is affordable if a new foodstore comes forward but no other use could generate the level of capital investment required. Without the bridge, there are potentially serious adverse consequences for:
- expansion of existing occupiers’ businesses;
- further employment use at RBP; and
- environmental improvement of the site
5.5 As noted in the NLP economic benefits assessment(^\\text{16}), the access bridge (contained within the second phase of the proposed second phase RBP development) is critical for the expansion of Pinelog operations; the wider redevelopment of RBP (including environmental enhancements); and associated additional employment within the area. Without the foodstore and therefore the access bridge, the expansion of Pinelog (along with other businesses within RBP) would not occur.
5.6 The granting of planning permission for an Aldi foodstore on the former Cintride site would potentially prevent significant levels of future investment at RBP from coming forward, jeopardising the expansion and future sustainability of important local businesses currently located at the site and therefore the additional employment that would be associated with such expansion.
5.7 In contrast, granting planning permission for a foodstore at the RBP site would not only encourage existing companies to remain at the site, but it would also allow them to consolidate and expand their businesses which would in turn attract other businesses to the area. This process of ‘agglomeration economics’ could potentially increase the likelihood that the former Cintride site and adjacent employment areas to come forward for economic uses. It would also provide a regenerative benefit by enhancing the various gateway sites in the vicinity of RBP, alongside more generalised environmental improvements across a wider area.
(^{16}) Ibid 6.0 Conclusion
6.1 To conclude, it is considered that on the basis of the evidence contained within this report, not only do the proposed RBP developments provide a greater potential number of overall employment benefits associated with the foodstore itself (c.70 operational FTE jobs compared to Aldi’s c.40 FTE jobs), there is also a very significant opportunity cost (or ‘benefit foregone’) which may be lost if permission is granted to the standalone Aldi foodstore on Buxton Road.
6.2 This is due to the much wider employment benefits associated with the RBP application, namely:
- The larger number of construction and operational jobs (both direct, indirect and induced) forecast for the RBP proposal relative to the Aldi application, the generation of which is dependent upon the RBP foodstore coming forward; and
- A foodstore not coming forward as part of the second phase of redevelopment at RBP would remove the viability of a new bridged access road into the site and hence almost certainty prevent it from coming forward. This in turn would drastically compromise the viability and/or attractiveness of the Business Park as a commercial site. This would further constrain business expansion/redevelopment, potentially leading to a spiral of decline in the local area as companies are forced to move away to locations that better meet the needs of modern businesses.
6.3 It is for these reasons that it is considered that the proposed foodstore at the RBP site provides a considerably larger and more comprehensive package of employment benefits that can be delivered by a standalone Aldi foodstore.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0633-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 7,
"total-input-tokens": 15950,
"total-output-tokens": 4365,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1998,
1
],
[
1998,
5234,
2
],
[
5234,
8361,
3
],
[
8361,
11492,
4
],
[
11492,
14548,
5
],
[
14548,
17081,
6
],
[
17081,
18698,
7
]
]
} |
d8a625409b9454984c2c0116349978cc7e98ab2f | Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment
Revision of Development and Restoration Scheme at Ballidon Quarry, Ballidon, Peak District National Park
Report Reference: CE-BQ0776-RP01 - FINAL
Produced by Crestwood Environmental Ltd.
3 June 2015 This report has been prepared in good faith, with all reasonable skill, care and diligence, based on information provided or known available at the time of its preparation and within the scope of work agreement with the client.
We disclaim any responsibility to the client and others in respect of any matters outside the scope of the above.
The report is provided for the sole use of the named client and is confidential to them and their professional advisors. No responsibility is accepted to others.
Crestwood Environmental Ltd. 1 & 2 Nightingale Place Pendeford Business Park Wobaston Road Wolverhampton WV9 5HF
Tel: 01902 824 037
Email: info@crestwoodenvironmental.co.uk Web: www.crestwoodenvironmental.co.uk CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................................. 3 1.1 BACKGROUND .............................................................................................................. 3 1.2 CONTEXT ....................................................................................................................... 3 1.3 KEY WORK .................................................................................................................... 4 1.4 OUTLINE METHODOLOGY .......................................................................................... 4
2 BASELINE SITUATION - LANDSCAPE ASPECTS ............................................................. 6 2.1 LANDSCAPE POLICY .................................................................................................. 6 2.2 LANDSCAPE DESIGNATIONS ..................................................................................... 10 2.3 REGISTERED PARKS AND GARDENS ........................................................................ 10 2.4 LISTED BUILDINGS, SCHEDULED MONUMENTS AND CONSERVATION AREAS ....... 10 2.5 HISTORIC LAND-USE AND COVER .......................................................................... 11 2.6 TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS .................................................................................. 11 2.7 RIGHTS OF WAY AND OPEN ACCESS LAND .............................................................. 11 2.8 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER ......................................................................................... 12 2.9 LANDSCAPE VALUE .................................................................................................. 18
3 BASELINE SITUATION - VISUAL ASPECTS ..................................................................... 20 3.1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................... 20 3.2 VISIBILITY ................................................................................................................... 20 3.3 VIEWPOINTS ............................................................................................................... 21
4 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL ASSESSMENT ...................................................................... 22 4.1 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS ............................................................................ 22 4.2 PREDICTED POTENTIAL IMPACTS ............................................................................. 23 4.3 IMPACT AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES .............................................. 23 4.4 EFFECTS ON LANDSCAPE CHARACTERISTICS AND CHARACTER ....................... 24 4.5 EFFECTS ON VISUAL AMENITY ................................................................................ 28 4.6 EFFECTS ON OTHER VISUAL RECEPTORS ............................................................... 40 4.7 SEQUENTIAL CUMULATIVE IMPACTS ....................................................................... 41
5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS ...................................................................................... 41 5.1 DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT ....................................................................................... 41 5.2 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL EFFECTS ......................................................................... 41 5.3 CONCLUSION .............................................................................................................. 41
LIST OF TABLES: Table 1 Landscape Guidelines ............................................................................................... 15 Table 2 Landscape Value of the Locality ............................................................................... 19 Table 3 Viewpoints (VPs) .................................................................................................... 21 Table 4 Predicted Potential Impacts ..................................................................................... 23 Table 5 Summary of Assessment of Significance of Landscape Effects ............................... 28 Table 6 Summary Visual Sensitivity of Receptors at Viewpoints (VPs) ................................. 30 LIST OF APPENDICES: APPENDIX 1 METHODOLOGY AND METHOD OF ASSESSMENT APPENDIX 2 FIGURES APPENDIX 3 LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES
LIST OF FIGURES IN APPENDIX: Figure L1: Landscape Context Plan Figure L2: Visibility Analysis Plan Figure L3: Viewpoint 1 Figure L4: Viewpoint 2 Figure L5: Viewpoint 3 Figure L6: Viewpoint 4 Figure L7: Viewpoint 5 Figure L8: Viewpoint 6 Figure L9: Viewpoint 6 Photomontage Figure L10: Viewpoint 7 Figure L11: Viewpoint 8 Figure L12: Viewpoint 9 Figure L13: Viewpoint 10 Figure L14: Viewpoint 11 Figure L15: Viewpoint 12 Figure L16: Viewpoint 12 Photomontage 1 INTRODUCTION
1.1 BACKGROUND
1.1.1 Crestwood Environmental Ltd (‘Crestwood’), a Registered Practice of the Landscape Institute, were commissioned by Lafarge Tarmac to undertake a Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) of proposals to revise the development and restoration scheme (‘the Proposed Development’) at Ballidon Quarry, (‘the Site’). The Site is divided into two main quarry areas (West Quarry and Woodbarn Quarry (shown as Hoe Grange Quarry on OS maps)), linked via a short informal private access road.
1.1.2 The location of the Site and its surrounding context are provided on Figure L1. The Site is located north of the small settlement of Ballidon, Derbyshire and lies within the Peak District National Park. The Site is centred on NGR: SK 20070 55500 and covers an area of circa 67.5 hectares (ha).
1.1.3 A detailed description of the Proposed Development is included in the accompanying planning application. In summary, the Proposed Development consists of:
- Reduction in height of, and reallocation of mineral waste from, ‘Tip 3’, located near the southern boundary of the Site; and
- A revised restoration scheme (including revised landform and habitat/land-use and progressive implementation (in six phases).
1.1.4 Specifically, the Proposed Development involves the partial removal of Tip 3 on the Southern Boundary of the quarry and using this material to bury and restore the high faces in the Western Quarry. This will be undertaken over a two year period, and will result in the sterilisation of deeper currently permitted reserves. However the loss of these reserves will be offset by modifying the development scheme to recover reserves previously inaccessible beneath Tip 3.
1.1.5 No increase in reserves will result from the Proposed Development and there will be no change in any of the other operating conditions at the Site. A significantly improved restoration scheme (allowing faces within West Quarry to be restored to a top-to-bottom slope (resembling a steep valley side) will be achieved, along with more sustainable quarry operations. The life of the consent will remain unchanged.
1.2 CONTEXT
1.2.1 Ballidon Quarry has been producing high purity carboniferous limestone since the 1950’s. The quality of the stone is such that it is sold predominantly into industrial markets for use as fillers in paints, plastics, animal feeds, pharmaceuticals and numerous other applications.
1.2.2 The current consent granted in 2004 permits the extraction of up to 1.1 million tonnes of limestone per annum, with a minimum 40% being sold into the industrial section. The current permission expires in 2040.
1.2.3 Readily available mineral reserves at Ballidon Quarry are limited, with some 5.0 million tonnes lying beneath quarry waste tips and beneath ground water in West Quarry. Whilst the reserves could be worked, their extraction would result in a restoration scheme comprising predominantly of steep sided quarry faces and the operations would be considered to be less sustainable than the permitted development.
1.3 KEY WORK
1.3.1 Crestwood have undertaken the following key tasks:
- A review of the planning documentation context for the Site;
- A desktop study and web search of relevant background documents and maps, including reviews of aerial photographs, LPA publications and other landscape character assessments;
- Collated information about relevant landscape designations;
- A field assessment of local site circumstances including a photographic survey, undertaken by a Chartered Landscape Architect, in suitable weather conditions during October 2014 and January 2015;
- Feedback into the design of the Proposed Development to avoid or minimise adverse impacts, including residual effects of the restored site; and
- An analysis of the likely landscape and visual effects arising from the Proposed Development, which includes an assessment of the significance of any effects arising, based on their nature (positive or negative), magnitude and the sensitivity of the receiving environment.
1.4 OUTLINE METHODOLOGY
1.4.1 This assessment considers the acceptability of the Proposed Development in the location proposed. It is based on a data trawl and a field visit to identify the most sensitive landscape and visual receptors, and considers their ability to accommodate the change proposed. The full method of assessment and methodology used is provided in Appendix 1 and, for the purposes accessibility, and summarised below, but it is strongly recommended that the assessment be read after the method of assessment and methodology is fully understood.
1.4.2 This assessment is conducted with regard to the principles set out in:
1. Landscape Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland (Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage, April 2002);
2. Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment 3rd Edition (The Landscape Institute, 2013) – referred to as ‘GLVIA’;
3. Photography and Photomontage in Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (Advice Note 01/11) (Landscape Institute, 2011); and
4. An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (Christine Tudor (Natural England), 2014).
1.4.3 The GLVIA document sets out a range of techniques and approaches which practitioners are advised to use when conducting Landscape and Visual Impact Assessments (LVIsAs) and Landscape and Visual Appraisals (LVAs), especially when carried out as part of an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) (paragraph 1.4). The intent of the GLVIA is to present a general overview of a ‘non-prescriptive’ methodology for undertaking assessments of developments: “It is always the primary responsibility of any landscape professional carrying out an assessment to ensure that the approach and methodology adopted are appropriate to the particular circumstances” (GLVIA, paragraph 1.20).
1.4.4 This assessment accords with the general principles of the GLVIA and is considered appropriately detailed to confidently assess the acceptability of both the principle and details of development in this location.
1.4.5 The assessment is undertaken in the context of the landscape being dynamic, as is made clear within the GLVIA (Para 2.13): “Landscape is not unchanging. Many different pressures have progressively altered familiar landscapes over time and will continue to do so in the future, creating new landscapes. Today many of these drivers of change arise from the requirements for development to meet the needs of a growing and changing population and economy”. This does not mean that any change is acceptable change, but it also means that change in the landscape is likely and that this should be channelled in a managed direction.
1.4.6 The nature of landscape and visual assessment requires both objective analysis and subjective professional judgement. Accordingly, the following assessment is in accordance with the principles of the guidance listed above, information and data analysis techniques and subjective professional judgement where necessary, and is based on clearly defined terms. An explanation of terms and abbreviations used are provided at the end of the assessment text and the methodology and method of assessment used is provided in Appendix 1.
1.4.7 In this assessment, the initial study area extended to 3km in all directions from the edge of the Site, as beyond this distance it is predicted that there would not be the potential for the Proposed Development to result in any significant landscape and visual effects.
1.4.8 An initial broad area of search for potential viewpoint locations was carried out using specialist digital terrain modelling and analysis software which was used to calculate a Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) of the Proposed Development, based on the ‘target points’ shown on Figure L2, assuming a ‘bare earth’ situation (i.e. not taking into account any topographical features other than landform). This potential visibility was then checked ‘in the field’, taking into account potential sensitive landscape and visual receptors.
1.4.9 It should be noted that the actual visibility is a much smaller area than the ZTV indicates, as the ZTV does not take into account the screening effects of vegetation or buildings (for example) and may coincide with areas without sensitive viewpoints or public access.
1.4.10 Using professional judgement, Landscape Characteristics have been initially assessed for potential sensitivity to change and a decision made as to whether individual characteristics can be scoped-out of further assessment. Where not scoped-out, assessment of these characteristics is undertaken in further detail, on the basis of the level of effects on these characteristics potentially being a material consideration, and presented as part of the assessment. Assessment of effects on Landscape Character is undertaken separately, taking into account all landscape characteristics, including those scoped-out of individual assessment. 2 BASELINE SITUATION - LANDSCAPE ASPECTS
2.1 LANDSCAPE POLICY
2.1.1 The current policy framework for planning control relating specifically to the Site is provided by the Development Plan comprised of the relevant policies described below.
European Landscape Convention
2.1.2 The UK is a signatory to the Council of Europe’s European Landscape Convention which promotes landscape protection, management and planning. The UK Government has stated that it considers the UK to be compliant with the ELC’s requirements and that the principal requirements of the ELC are already enshrined in the existing suite of national policies and guidance on the assessment of landscape and visual effects.
2.1.3 It is important to recognise that the ELC does not require the preservation of all landscapes although landscape protection is one of the core themes of the convention. Equally important though is the requirement to manage and plan future landscape change.
National Planning Policy - Landscape
2.1.4 An appreciation of the ‘weight’ to be attributed to any landscape effects arising from development starts with an understanding of the planning context within which any such development is to be tested for its acceptability.
2.1.5 It is stated in paragraph 14 of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) (Department for Communities and Local Government, 2012) that “At the heart of the National Planning Policy Framework is a presumption in favour of sustainable development, which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking’. It goes on to state that in terms of Council decision making this means that ‘where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out of date, granting permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted”.
2.1.6 Paragraph 115 of the NPPF states: “Great weight should be given to conserving landscape and scenic beauty in National Parks, the Broads and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which have the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. The conservation of wildlife and cultural heritage are important considerations in all these areas, and should be given great weight in National Parks and the Broads”.
2.1.7 Policy guidance on the English National Parks is also provided in “English National Parks and the Broads UK Government Vision and Circular 2010” (Defra, 2010) and is due for review in 2015. It provides a vision for the English National Parks (and the Broads): 2.1.8 Under Paragraph 141 of this document, under ‘mineral working’, it states “The Parks are a vital source of some of the minerals that society and the economy needs, including certain building stone and small quarries which provide building materials to maintain the character of the local built heritage. Quarry works may also provide employment within the Park boundary. It is important therefore that the need for minerals and the impacts of extraction and processing on people and the environment are managed in an integrated way.”
Local Planning Policy
2.1.9 The Site lies within the Peak District National Park. The Peak District National Park Authority (PDNPA) is the sole planning authority for land and property within the Peak District National Park and acts as the Minerals Planning Authority. Whilst considering the planning needs of the area, the PDNPA is required to have regard to the purposes of the National Park designation:
- Conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage; and
- Promote opportunities for the understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of national parks by the public.
If there’s a conflict between these two purposes, conservation takes priority.
2.1.10 A number of planning policy documents apply, including:
- Local Development Framework Core Strategy;
- Peak District Local Plan Saved Policies; and
- Minerals Strategic Action Plan. 2.1.11 Planning Practice Guidance (Department for Communities and Local Government, n.d.) states that National Park Authorities “should have regard to management plans for National Parks..., as these documents underpin partnership working and delivery of designation objectives. The management plans highlight the value and special qualities of these designations to society and show communities and partners how their activity contributes to protected landscape purposes.
National Parks... management plans do not form part of the statutory development plan, but may contribute to setting the strategic context for development by providing evidence and principles, which should be taken into account in the local planning authorities’ Local Plans and any neighbourhood plans in these areas.
National Parks and Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty management plans may also be material considerations in making decisions on individual planning applications, where they raise relevant issues.”
Peak District National Park Local Development Framework Core Strategy
2.1.12 A number of relevant policies from the Local Development Framework Core Strategy (Peak District National Park Authority, Adopted 2011), including:
- GSP2: Enhancing the National Park.
- L1: Landscape character and valued characteristics.
- L2: Sites of biodiversity or geo-diversity importance.
- L3: Cultural heritage assets of archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic significance.
- MIN1: Minerals development.
- MIN4: Mineral safeguarding.
2.1.13 The Core Strategy states, in 9.14, “Core policies for landscapes and conservation will contribute to the spatial outcomes as follows:
- Across the whole National Park policies will:
- Apply strict protection of the Natural Zone;
- Manage development through careful consideration of landscape character;
- Conserve and enhance Conservation Areas;
- Support work with partners to reduce the size and amount of road signage in open landscapes;
- Conserve and enhance green infrastructure.
- Across the White Peak and Derwent Valley policies will:
- Protect and manage the distinctive and valued historic character of the settled, agricultural landscapes of the White Peak, while seeking opportunities to enhance the wild character and diversity of remoter areas; · Protect and manage the settled, agricultural character of the Derwent Valley landscapes, seeking opportunities to enhance wooded character, cultural heritage and biodiversity;
· Manage floodplain landscapes to increase flood storage and enhance biodiversity;
· Protect and manage the tranquil pastoral landscapes and distinctive cultural character of the Derbyshire Peak Fringe through sustainable landscape management, seeking opportunities to enhance woodlands, wetlands, cultural heritage and biodiversity.”
Peak District Local Plan Saved Policies
2.1.14 A number of relevant policies from the 2001 Local Plan have been saved “until the Local Development Framework Core Strategy fully replaces them” (Peak District National Park, n.d.):
- Policy LM1: Assessing and minimising the environmental impact of mineral activity.
- Policy LM9: Ancillary mineral development.
- Policy LC1: Conserving and managing the Natural Zone.
- Policy LC4: Design, layout and landscaping.
- Policy LC6: Listed Buildings.
- Policy LC15: Historic and cultural heritage sites and features.
- Policy LC17: Sites, features or species of wildlife, geological or geomorphological importance.
- Policy LC18: Safeguarding, recording and enhancing nature conservation interests when development is acceptable.
- Policy LC19: Assessing the nature conservation importance of sites not subject to statutory designation.
- Policy LC20: Protecting trees, woodlands or other landscape features put at risk by development.
Peak District Minerals Strategic Action Plan
2.1.15 The PDNPA also has a Minerals Strategic Action Plan (Peak District National Park Authority, 2003) which is primarily concerned with implementing policy and deciding how the Authority applies its statutory planning function to minerals applications.
Peak District National Park Management Plan
2.1.16 The Peak District National Park Management Plan (Peak District National Park Authority, n.d.) consists of a vision and four linked strategic themes which set out aims for the National Park. In turn, each of themes has four outcomes that give details of the actions needed to achieve those aims. Specific relevant Delivery Outcomes include ‘DL1’ and ‘DL2’.
2.1.17 DL 1 Landscape: The diverse national park landscapes will adapt to challenges whilst retaining their special qualities and natural beauty. The delivery aims for this are: • Address demand for development whilst conserving and enhancing the special qualities of the national park, in keeping with the Landscape Strategy and Character Assessment;
• Deliver conservation on a landscape scale through a diverse range of models, in keeping with the Landscape Character Assessment and supporting adaptation to climate change;
• Ensure that the conservation of landscape character areas extends beyond the national park boundaries;
• Support farms and other rural businesses to achieve national park purposes; and
• Highlight the impacts of inappropriate lighting, and promote the opportunities for dark skies with residents, businesses and Peak District Dark Skies group.
2.1.18 **DL 3 Biodiversity and ecosystems:** The richness of the natural environment will be conserved, restored and enhanced so wildlife can thrive, ecological systems continue to improve and its diverse geology is retained and valued. The delivery aims for this are:
• Conserve and enhance geo and bio-diversity by continued action for priority habitats, sites and species within the national park in line with the Biodiversity Action Plan;
• On development sites ensure geodiversity and biodiversity interests are protected and where possible enhanced;
• Focus on the natural environment, ecosystem services and the part we play in these systems through integrated action and fostering greater understanding;
• Manage river water quality and supply within the National Park; and
• Respond appropriately and adequately to new animal and plant health risks and invasive species.
2.2 **LANDSCAPE DESIGNATIONS**
2.2.1 The Site and lies within the Peak District National Park, in Ballidon Parish, Derbyshire, with the boundary of the Park lying 725m to the east at its nearest point. This also forms the western boundary of the Derbyshire Dales District administrative area (see Figures L1 and L2).
2.2.2 No part of the Site lies within or within 3km of a non-statutorily designated landscape such as a Special Landscape Area.
2.3 **REGISTERED PARKS AND GARDENS**
2.3.1 No part of the Site lies within or within 3km of a Registered Park or Garden.
2.4 **LISTED BUILDINGS, SCHEDULED MONUMENTS AND CONSERVATION AREAS**
2.4.1 A formal assessment of the historical setting of these heritage features falls outside the scope of this LVIA, but the issues are addressed as part of the Cultural Heritage study set out in Section 4 of the ES. However, in the course of Crestwood’s desktop study and assessment of the Site, the following was found (see Figure L1): 2.4.2 There is one listed building within the Site itself; this being the Operator’s offices building. This is a Grade II listed former farmhouse. A number of Listed Buildings lie within 3km of the Site. The majority of these are largely contained in the nearby village of Parwich (35 of the 48 total). Seven are situated on the approach road to the Site, in and around the settlement of Ballidon.
2.4.3 A number of Scheduled Monuments also lie within 1km of the Site, with a small number being close to the Site’s boundary (to the immediate north). Several more are dispersed across the wider area, within 3km of the Site’s boundary. The Scheduled Monuments consist largely of Prehistoric and Romano-British settlements, field layouts and barrows. Conservation Areas are present at Ballidon and at Parwich.
2.5 HISTORIC LAND-USE AND COVER
2.5.1 The Site was previously comprised of medium-large sized agricultural fields with rectilinear boundaries; it is likely that these were dry stone walls. The Site was, in general, an open and agrarian area typical of the surrounding landscape, with steeper areas being more wooded/scrubby, as survives in part today. Historic maps show the land use change to quarrying between 1955 and 1975.
2.6 TREE PRESERVATION ORDERS
2.6.1 The co-ordinators of this development project have indicated that there are no Tree Preservation Orders (TPO) affecting the Site.
2.7 RIGHTS OF WAY AND OPEN ACCESS LAND
2.7.1 A number of public rights of way (PRoWs) are present in the vicinity of the Site (see Figure L2); the nearest being a footpath (FP6) that runs between the two quarry areas (east-west), and another (FP5) that runs largely east-west to the south of the Site. There is also a track running in a largely north-south direction immediately east of the Site – labelled on OS maps as ‘other route with public access’.
2.7.2 Two promoted recreational public routes pass within 1km of the Site:
- Pennine Bridleway National Trail (550m to the northeast at its nearest point, running generally northwest-southeast); and
- Limestone Way bridleway (long distance path, 585m to the south at its nearest point, running east-west generally).
2.7.3 The Pennine Bridleway route is also shared in part by the Midshires Way, London to Edinburgh path, London To Newhaven Crossing, the High Peak Trail and National Cycle Route 54.
2.7.4 The Limestone Way also shares part of its route with the Dovedale Round circular route and the Peakland Way (to the south of Parwich).
2.7.5 The Tissington Trail (which is also National Cycle Route 68) passes circa 2.65km to the southwest.
2.7.6 Other pertinent nearby footpaths (within 1km) include:
- FP10 c. 60m west, running southwestwards;
- FP11 and 12 (joins Parwich FP10), c. 450m west, running north-south – which also shares its path with the Peakland Way;
- FP3, c. 760m south running southwards from Ballidon; and
- FP8, c. 490m to the north, running northeastwards.
2.7.7 There are a small number of areas of Access Land near to the Site (see Figure L2), including:
- A long narrow stretch of land on a west-facing valley side immediately east of the Site;
- An area surrounding Roystone Rocks, 500m to the north; and
- An area circa 410m to the east, at its nearest point.
- A short permissive route (provided under a Natural England farm conservation scheme) links up from footpath FP8 (at its junction with Gallowlow Lane (track)) running northeastwards to Minninglow Hill and then northwestwards to link up with the High Peak Trail.
2.8 LANDSCAPE CHARACTER
Introduction
2.8.1 Landscape and visual assessment is comprised of a study of two separate but inter-linked components:
- **Landscape character** – which is the physical make up and condition of the landscape itself. Landscape character arises from a distinct, recognisable and consistent pattern of physical and social elements, aesthetic factors and perceptual aspects; and
- **Visual amenity** – which is the way in which the Site is seen and appreciated; views to and from the Site, their direction, character and sensitivity to change.
2.8.2 This section summarises and reviews relevant published landscape assessments which contribute to a better understanding of the Site’s and locality’s landscape character.
National Landscape Character Assessment
2.8.3 The landscape of England has been subject to a nationwide landscape character assessment which divides England into National Character Areas (NCAs). The Site lies within NCA 52, **White Peak** (Natural England, 2012). The relevant characteristics of this NCA are broadly described as:
- "The White Peak National Character Area is a raised, undulating limestone plateau deeply incised with steep-sided limestone valleys. It has a strong sense of place arising from the effect of the underlying geology on landform and its influence on natural and manmade landscape features such as caves, crags, drystone walls and traditional buildings.
- The settlement pattern is primarily of small nucleated villages and isolated farmsteads, along with the market towns of Buxton and Bakewell and the spa town of Matlock Bath.
- In terms of ecosystem services, the area is particularly important for the provision of cultural services: sense of place/inspiration, sense of history, recreation, biodiversity and geodiversity.
- The plateau is rich in archaeology, from Neolithic burial mounds and stone circles, such as Minninglow and Arbor Low, to the remains of early lead workings. “
2.8.4 A number of factors are described in the ‘Landscape Change’ section; however because these cover the whole character area they are quite generic. Therefore, following the fieldwork, only the following has been considered relevant to the Site and immediate area:
- “The area of new tree planting in recent years has been small. Between 1999 and 2003 only an area equivalent to 1 per cent of the 1999 total stock was approved for new planting under a Woodland Grant Scheme agreement (28 ha); and
- Two of the largest limestone quarries within the Peak District National Park are located within the White Peak: Tunstead Old Moor and Ballidon. Limestone from the White Peak supplies markets mainly in the Midlands, north-west and east England, and Yorkshire.”
Natural Area Profile
2.8.5 The Site lies within the White Peak Natural Area (No. 30) (Natural England, n.d.). This states:
“The area consists of a gently rolling plateau overlain by acidic wind-blown deposits dissected by steep-sided dales. The Karst scenery is often dramatic and spectacular caves are a notable feature. The pale limestone is characteristic, contrasting strongly with the dark gritstones of the surrounding region. The plateau has been completely cleared of its natural woodland. The resultant heath has since largely disappeared under the plough, and today highly productive meadows and permanent pastures prevail, interspersed with limestone walls and planted shelterbelts. The dales contain the greater part of the area’s considerable biological interest, and are renowned as a meeting point of southern and northern species.
Settlement is sparse on the plateau, with the larger towns to be found along its edges. Nucleated villages and small towns are linked by crest and valley roads, some of Roman origin. The use of combinations of limestone and gritstone as building materials results in the lack of a distinctive building style. The two spa towns of Matlock Bath and Buxton are the largest settlements. Bakewell, within the National Park, provides a focus for tourism and recreation.”
2.8.6 The overarching relevant objectives are listed as:
- “Improve the value of the farmed landscape on the plateau for a wide range of wildlife by promoting environmentally-friendly agriculture on semi-improved and improved grassland.
- Safeguard species-rich meadows, permanent pasture and road verges on the plateau and complement their value by promoting environmentally-sensitive management on surrounding grassland. Enhance poorly-managed examples.
- Develop semi-natural woodland cover on the plateau by extending and linking existing semi-natural woodland and plantations.
- Maximise opportunities for nature conservation in the reclamation of quarries and vein mineral workings.”
Local Landscape Character Assessment
2.8.7 The published applicable local Landscape Character Assessment (Peak District National Park Authority and Countryside, 2009) places the Site in the Limestone Plateau Pastures Landscape Character Type, immediately abutting the Limestone Dales Landscape Character Type (LCT) (see Figure L1).
2.8.8 The assessment outlines the Limestone Plateau Pastures LCT as being:
“An upland pastoral landscape with a regular pattern of straight roads and small to medium sized rectangular fields bounded by limestone walls. Tree cover is mostly limited to occasional tree groups, or small shelter belts, allowing wide views to the surrounding higher ground.”
2.8.9 The characteristics that are relevant to the Site include:
- A rolling upland plateau;
- Pastoral farmland enclosed by limestone walls;
- A regular pattern of small to medium sized rectangular fields;
- Discrete tree groups and belts of trees;
- Medieval granges surrounded by older fields;
- Relict lead mining and quarrying remains; and
- Open views to surrounding higher ground.
2.8.10 The Site abuts the Limestone Dales LCT. The assessment outlines this type as: “A steeply sloping dale landscape with limestone outcrops and extensive tracts of woodland and scrub intermixed with limestone grassland. In some smaller dales this is an intimate, secluded landscape where views are tightly controlled by landform and tree cover, in others the dales are wild and open.”
2.8.11 Although the Site lies mostly within the Limestone Plateau Pastures landscape type, there is strong reasoning for the Limestone Dales LCT being more appropriate to the Site, being “an intimate, secluded and largely semi-natural landscape, where views are often tightly controlled by landform and tree cover.”
2.8.12 Characteristics of the LCT relevant to the Site include:
- Steep sided Limestone Dales;
- Craggy outcrops, cliffs and scree slopes;
- Extensive patches of limestone grassland;
- Interlocking blocks and ancient semi-natural woodland, secondary woodland and scrub;
- Largely unsettled, apart from occasional small mill settlements; and
- Historic mineral working (quarrying, lead mining).
2.8.13 The Landscape Guidelines for the two areas are included in Appendix 3 as extracts from the Landscape Strategy document (Peak District National Park Authority and Countryside, 2009). The key relevant priorities that could be applied to the Site and Proposed Development are summarised in Table 1 Landscape Guidelines
| Priority | Limestone Plateau Pastures LCT | Limestone Dales LCT | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------|---------------------| | Protect and maintain the historic field pattern | All areas | Not a priority | | Protect and maintain historic drystone walls | All areas | Some areas | | Protect and maintain historic field barns | All areas | Not a priority | | Manage and enhance surviving areas of natural landscapes | Some areas | All areas | | Enhance the diversity of agricultural grassland | Some areas | All areas | | Manage traditional plantation woodlands | Some areas | ‘Generally not appropriate’ | | Manage and enhance woodlands | ‘Generally not appropriate’ | All areas | | Manage and enhance linear tree cover and amenity trees | Some areas | Not a priority | | Manage the network of tracks and footpaths to maximise opportunities to enjoy the landscape | Not a priority | Some areas | | Manage historic mineral landscapes | Some areas | Not a priority | | Create areas of limestone grassland and heath | Not a priority | All areas | | Create new native broadleaved woodland | Not a priority | ‘Generally not appropriate’ | | Develop appropriate landscapes from mineral workings | Some areas | Not a priority |
2.8.14 It is noted that ‘creating new native broadleaved woodland’ is ‘generally inappropriate’ and that ‘developing appropriate landscapes from mineral workings’ is not a priority in the Limestone Dales LCT. There is a distinction between areas that are currently considered to fall within a particular LCT (in the character assessment) and the character type that would best be applied as a match to a modified landscape, as would be the case at Ballidon Quarry, therefore some consideration of these priorities to the specific situation at Ballidon Quarry would need to be applied.
Landscape Characteristics from Fieldwork
2.8.15 Crestwood conducted an assessment of the Site’s and the surrounding area’s landscape characteristics in October 2014. The individual characteristics of the Site and locality were noted, as was the condition of these. The Site’s and locality’s key characteristics and its local context are outlined below.
Landform
2.8.16 The general landform in the vicinity of the Site is variable, as shown by the contours on Figures L1 and L2. The Site also has significant variations of landform (elevation and slope) characteristic of an operational hard rock quarry, with benching and sheer faces present in many of the worked areas.
2.8.17 The main quarry area (West Quarry) has a low point of circa 167mAOD (in the western sector) but, generally, the internal levels are around 180-210mAOD. Woodbarn Quarry has a low point of circa 214mAOD (in the western sector) but is circa 240mAOD in the eastern sector. The periphery of the Site is generally substantially higher than the internal areas, this being a combination of natural and man-made landform. On the southern boundary of the main quarry, the landform is comprised largely of ‘Tip 3’ which is a man-made east-west orientated ridge with a high point of circa 272mAOD, towards the eastern extent. The ridge gently falls to circa 263mAOD along its longitudinal length to the west. The north-facing (internal) and south-facing (external) slopes of the ridge are circa 1:2.5 and 1:3 gradient respectively.
2.8.18 The link between West Quarry and Woodbarn Quarry is via a narrow gap, lower than adjacent levels outside the Site, over which a land bridge runs for circa 35m (east to west). Aside from this, the land lying between the two quarry areas is separated by steep embankments, on both sides of the quarry, of circa 20m height forming a valley/dale landform through which footpath FP6 runs.
2.8.19 The surrounding landscape: The land is generally of higher elevation to the north and lower elevation to the south, although there is significant variation in landform and elevation over the general area with deep dales / valley features running through the area. The Site forms the most northerly point of a widening valley (heading southwards) with occasional hillocks but generally lying at around 170mAOD. This valley is met by valleys running from the northwest (within which Parwich lies), the west-northwest, the northeast and the east, all converging circa 2km south of the Site in a low-lying area circa 1.3km across.
2.8.20 These valleys also provide for stretches of higher land (generally over 190mAOD) between them. Immediately south-southwest of the Site, a rounded ridge extends for circa 1km, with a short valley running immediately north between the Site and Parwich before rising sharply northwards into the plateau area, but still generally rising northwards to the immediate west of the Site, tying into the western boundary of the Site.
2.8.21 To the north of the Site, valleys/dales do extend further becoming gradually less pronounced. Hillocks form localised features, e.g. at Roystone Rocks (at circa 325m AOD, circa 800m to the north) and Minninglow Hill (circa 372mAOD, circa 1.3km to the northeast). Generally, to the north, the land lies at circa 280mAOD in the valleys and otherwise at circa 320mAOD, excepting for high points.
2.8.22 On the eastern boundary of the Site a strong embankment of 30m height or more forms the western part of a pronounced north-south orientated valley / dale feature, which sharply rises again outside the Site from circa 220m, eastwards, reaching over 300mAOD within 0.5km distance to the northeast and rising circa 45m over a distance of circa 130m to the east. A shallower dale runs east-west, transecting the eastern side of this dale. Generally, the land rises to the northeast to circa 360mAOD, in a broad undulating plateau. To the east, the land rises to a highpoint of 298mAOD before sharply falling away into a steep valley before rising again, where the land is much more undulating and generally lower than areas to the north (around 300mAOD).
2.8.23 Immediately southeast of the Site, there is a separate small but steeply-sided previous quarry which breaks up the steep eastern side of the dale feature which would otherwise flow southwards along the boundary of the Site and beyond. The eastern steep slopes turn eastwards circa 400m south of the Site, forming a ‘cove’ landform as it then turns south and westwards, also contributing to a localised promontory of circa 230mAOD, circa 630m south-southeast of the Site boundary.
Settlement, Built Development and Infrastructure
2.8.24 The Site: There are no dwellings within the Site itself, however office buildings and other buildings and plant associated with the quarry are present and would remain unaffected by the Proposed Development. 2.8.25 The surrounding landscape: The area is generally not densely populated. There are two settlements near the Site:
- Ballidon village (190m south of the Site at its nearest point); and
- Parwich village (785m southwest of the Site at its nearest point).
2.8.26 Further afield, there are additional villages at:
- Bradbourne (circa 2.5km to the south-southeast);
- Brassington (circa 2.5km to the east-southeast); and
- Longcliffe (circa 2km to the east)
2.8.27 A number of dwellings, farmsteads and properties are dispersed over the wider area. Those within 1km of the Site include:
- Oldfield Farm (understood to not be inhabited) (to the southeast);
- Ballidon Moor Farm (to the east) – also a camping/caravan site;
- Hoe Grange (to the east);
- Daisy Bank (to the northeast);
- Roystone Grange (to the north);
- Lowmoor Cottages (to the north-northwest);
- Rock View (to the north-northwest);
- Lowmoor Farm (to the north-northwest);
- Twodale Barn (derelict - to the northwest); and
- Hilltop Farm (to the west).
2.8.28 All Saint’s Church lies immediately south of Ballidon and is seemingly in an unsafe condition.
2.8.29 There are no major roads or railways passing through the area. A minor road (no through road) provides access to the Site, through Ballidon, leading from Highway Lane circa 1.5km to the south of the Site. Highway Lane leads to Backhill Lane, which passes to the west of the Site (80m) and beyond, northwards. Monsdale Lane is a very narrow lane that runs from Backhill Lane at a point to the southwest of the Site, westwards to Parwich. Another minor road runs from Backhill Lane, southwestwards from appoint close to the northwest corner of the Site. Other roads traverse through the area without being a significant component of the landscape.
2.8.30 Masts, pylon towers and other similar infrastructure is generally absent from the area, although a two-turbine windfarm (circa 24.5m tall) is present to the north-northwest of Hilltop Farm and a larger four-turbine scheme is visible from the area over 4km to the east at Carsington Pasture. Land-use and Vegetation Cover
2.8.31 The Site: The Site is an operational limestone quarry with large areas of exposed mineral and mineral/overburden tips and stockpiles, with peripheral areas consisting of a combination of limestone grassland, scrub and areas of woodland. Well-established broadleaved woodland is notable by its presence on the outer slopes of Tip 3, along the western boundary of the Site and on high points on the eastern embankment and around the entrance and plant area (in the southeastern corner). These have generally been planted since the quarry became operational. The species mix present is generally not considered to be wholly representative of woodlands characteristic of the area.
2.8.32 The surrounding landscape: Generally, the landscape is pastoral, with a combination of valued semi-natural habitats (represented by Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and SSSI designations, including immediately adjacent to the Site at Ballidon Dale SSSI) and mixed agriculture (including sheep grazing, dairy and improve grassland for cropping). Quarrying is also evident at different scales in the area including old abandoned small sites and larger modern current operations.
2.8.33 Woodland is not a strong component of the landscape in plan area, but, where present, has a marked effect, usually in combination with pronounced landform. Woodland is notable on south-facing slopes to the north and northeast of Parwich, in smaller areas lying between the Site and Ballidon and in parts of steeper valleys present and generally trees are more prevalent in the lower-lying areas (e.g. in hedgerows, which form the prevalent field boundary in these areas). Stone walls and fencing form the prevalent field boundary on higher areas.
2.9 LANDSCAPE VALUE
2.9.1 Landscape Value is one aspect used to help determine the sensitivity of the landscape. Determination of Landscape Value requires a degree of professional judgement, based on the findings in the desk studies and field work. Overall Landscape Value is derived, in this assessment, using criteria on a number of contributing factors (e.g. Scenic Quality), see Tables Ap1 – Ap10 in Methodology and Method of Assessment in Appendix 1.
Value of Landscape Character and Characteristics
2.9.2 A number of relevant aspects are relevant to determination of the Landscape value of the Site and area as described below.
2.9.3 Landscape Protection - No Site lies within a National Park. There are no TPOs affecting trees within or along the Site’s boundaries.
2.9.4 Landscape Condition - The Site overall has been significantly affected by quarrying operations and woodland planting have become well-established elements in the landscape, although do not wholly comprise of characteristic species. The wider area has significant time-continuity with well-preserved features, although some elements are in disrepair (e.g. All Saint’s Church at Ballidon).
2.9.5 Scenic Quality – The Site is generally a detracting feature of the landscape due to areas of man-made and engineered landform, large-scale built elements and lack of vegetation cover. The wider landscape has high scenic quality, as would be expected, with some detracting elements (e.g. unkempt farms and wind turbines). 2.9.6 Rarity – The landscape elements are largely regionally distinctive.
2.9.7 Representativeness – The landscape characteristics are of a good example of its kind.
2.9.8 Conservation Interest - There are numerous ecological, archaeological and geological designations and items of interest adjoining the Site with much less present within the Site.
2.9.9 Tranquillity – Secluded parts of the landscape are fairly ‘wild’ in character, where there is a sense of remoteness or isolation. Human influences are not dominant, with settlement being sparsely distributed. Occasional minor detractors to an experience of tranquillity, but otherwise strong.
2.9.10 Associations – Wikipedia states that Ballidon was the site of an ambush of troops of the Jacobean Rebellion.
2.9.11 Recreational Value – Numerous recreational rights of way pass through the area (none through the Site) within a National Park.
2.9.12 Agricultural Value – Much of the Site is an operational quarry and otherwise of low agricultural value. The general area is Grade 4 with occasional areas of Grade 3.
2.9.13 The factors contributing have been summarised in Table 2.
### Table 2 Landscape Value of the Locality
| Value Level | Protection | Landscape Condition | Scenic Quality | Rarity | Representativeness | Conservation Interests | Tranquillity/Wildness | Associations | Recreational Value | Agricultural Value | |-------------|------------|---------------------|----------------|--------|-------------------|------------------------|----------------------|--------------|-------------------|-------------------| | Very High | ✓ | | | | ✓ | | ✓ | | ✓ | | | High | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | | | | | | Medium | | | | | | | | | | | | Low | | | | | | | | | | ✓ | | Very Low | | | | | | | | | | |
2.9.14 Overall, the characteristics and landscape character of the locality have been assessed as having a **High** landscape value, although with greater value for individual aspects. The Site itself has clearly been heavily revised in relation to natural landforms, habitats etc. forming a transitional aspect of the landscape. The overall value of the Site itself is **Low**, although clearly the Site does lie within the National Park designation, forming a Very High aspect of the Landscape Value in its own right. 3 BASELINE SITUATION - VISUAL ASPECTS
3.1 INTRODUCTION
3.1.1 This section describes the views available to and from the Site, their distribution, character and sensitivity to change. Crestwood has conducted an assessment of the views available to and from the Site by the public through a combination of desk studies and fieldwork.
3.1.2 An examination of the Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) of the Proposed Development and verification in the field enabled 12 viewpoints to be identified within the study area (see Figure L2).
3.1.3 Predicted visibility of the Proposed Development is normally greater in winter (when trees and hedgerows have no leaves) and the fieldwork was undertaken during autumn and winter, giving a good understanding of the visual screening effects of broadleaved woodland present.
3.2 VISIBILITY
3.2.1 The ZTV calculation was based on a bare earth model using a number of ‘high points’ within various parts of the Site as the ‘targets’ to test for visibility. This largely represents a worst case situation as it doesn’t allow for the screening that may be afforded by interlying topographical elements (e.g. buildings and areas of woodland). The actual areas from which the Proposed Development would be visible are therefore expected to be significantly less than shown on Figure L2. The amount of the Proposed Development visible and the sensitivity of the receptors within the ZTV are not represented by the ZTV and of course the ZTV coincides with large areas of farmland where public access is not provided.
3.2.2 Generally, the Proposed Development is more visible from the south than from the north. Generally, terrain (at the Site and outwith the Site) is the single most influential aspect determining visibility of the Proposed Development.
3.2.3 To the north, the visibility is limited by higher land immediately north of the Site, limiting potential visibility to the highest lying areas.
3.2.4 To the immediate east, the visibility is severely limited within the adjacent valley (dale) feature but as the land rises the areas of theoretical visibility broaden. After circa 0.65km from the Site boundary, the land falls away again, severely limiting opportunities to see the Site, although a higher area of land between Brassington and Longcliffe provides additional opportunities from about 1.75km away from the Site boundary.
3.2.5 To the south, the Site is potentially visible from a large area of land. To the southeast, the land falls away from a distance of circa 1-1.5km distance from the Site boundary, near Bradbourne. To the southwest the visibility is severely restricted from within the Bletch Brook valley (circa 2km to the southwest) and from low-lying land immediately east of Parwich. Visibility is restricted beyond circa 3km to the southwest, near Tissington.
3.2.6 To the west and northwest the visibility is strongly restricted, generally to areas within 1km distance of the Site’s boundary, although visibility is potentially available from further afield to the north-northwest.
3.2.7 Aside from the visual screening effects of the terrain, there are some noteworthy screening effects of woodland also, the effects of which are not demonstrated on the ZTV on Figure L2:
- Along the western edge of the Site, there is a mature broadleaved woodland which strongly restricts views from the west and northwest;
- To the southwest, north of Monsdale Lane, mature woodland provides a screening effect from low-lying areas to the nearby southwest, notably from within Parwich; and
- Woodland present and retained within and immediately outside of the Site to the south – this provides significant screening from lower-lying areas to the south (including Ballidon itself).
### 3.3 VIEWPOINTS
3.3.1 The locations of a representative range of viewpoints where views could be potentially influenced by the Proposed Development are illustrated on Figure L2 and were agreed with the PDNPA (as considered by Garrie Tiedeman (the Authority’s Landscape Architect), David Bent and Andrew Barton) in February 2015. ‘Viewpoints’ have been selected to best represent the variety of views available from public vantage points towards the Proposed Development.
3.3.2 The selected views are labelled by viewpoint ID numbers: Viewpoints 1 to 12, described in Table 3 and illustrated in the Figures.
#### Table 3 Viewpoints (VPs)
| VP No. | Location | Reason for selection | |--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 1 | On southern Site boundary, on public highway near entrance to the Site and Footpath FP5. | Close-range view potentially affecting a skyline. | | 2 | 150m east of the Site on elevated Access Land. | Close-range view representing views from two areas of Access Land (one Close range, another Medium range). | | 3 | 240m northeast of the Site on elevated Access Land. | Close-range view representing views from area of Access Land and Medium range views beyond from Pennine Bridleway recreational route. | | 4 | 700m east-northeast of the Site from Pennine Bridleway. | Medium-range view from Pennine Bridleway recreational route. | | 5 | 900m northwest of Site on public footpath FP12. | Medium-range view from higher land to the northwest. | | 6 | 600m south of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. | Medium-range view from near Ballidon village on long distance recreational route, at a low-lying location with the Site forming the skyline. | 3.3.3 The predicted change in views in relation to the existing situation is described in the assessment section below.
4 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL ASSESSMENT
4.1 ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITATIONS
4.1.1 It is assumed that the Site would otherwise continue to be worked and restored as per the consented plans, should permission not be granted, as the ‘do nothing’ scenario.
4.1.2 The assessment is made against a baseline situation assuming that:
- Without the granting of permission, the existing consented mineral extraction operations would cease and restoration be complete by 2040;
- The approved restoration plan for the Existing Quarry Complex is assumed to be Drawing no. NL00852 (Landscape Restoration Masterplan), dated February 2000;
- The proposed works are undertaken in accordance with the Phasing Plans submitted in the planning application with restoration and aftercare initiated as soon as practicably possible; and
- The Proposed Development would be implemented in 6 main operational phases, plus final restoration (for a period of around 2 years) with works to remove Tip 3 taking circa 2 years.
4.1.3 It is assumed that the recommended impact avoidance/mitigation measures are incorporated. This includes use of best practice landscaping construction, planting and ongoing management/maintenance techniques to promote rapid establishment, prevent rapid deterioration and increase amenity, biodiversity and other functions of the residual landscape. It is also assumed that any required specific restoration details can be produced for approval (e.g. as a requirement by planning condition), based on the masterplan proposals provided as part of this application, and implemented in full.
4.1.4 The fieldwork was undertaken during daylight hours during early autumn and winter 2014, providing a good understanding of the worst-case seasonal effects on views. No access was available to private locations to ascertain actual views from these specific locations.
4.1.5 The information used for the assessment of cumulative effects was made using the information available for other developments in the locality at the time of the assessment.
4.2 PREDICTED POTENTIAL IMPACTS
4.2.1 Taking the assumptions in Section 4.1 into account, the predicted potential visual and landscape impacts are expected to primarily relate to the tip and mineral extraction operations in the Tip 3 area, although changes to the restoration proposals and changes to the visibility of existing quarry have the potential to create different visual and landscape impacts to those created by the approved scheme of working.
4.2.2 The Proposed Development also provides a good opportunity to reduce a number of existing adverse visual and landscape (in particular) effects and provide improvements over the existing approved situation; notably in relation to landform and restored habitats.
4.2.3 The potential sources of impact are identified as outlined in Table 4 and, without consideration of being addressed, have the potential to adversely affect visual amenity and landscape character both from within and from outside the Site.
| Source of Potential Impact | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Change of land cover and landscape elements (during operational and restoration period), most noticeably from removal of semi-mature woodland. | | Increased visibility of the existing and proposed quarry operations and associated plant, principally through the reduction in height of much of Tip 3. | | Temporary landform changes during mineral extraction (exposed rock faces and benches) and from tips and mounds. | | Permanent landform changes upon restoration – mostly likely to be positive through appropriate landform design. | | Soil handling operations and associated machine movements. |
4.3 IMPACT AVOIDANCE AND MITIGATION MEASURES
4.3.1 Alternative directions of working, depths of working and restoration scheme configurations were all considered when seeking the most effective scheme for the Proposed Development. Limitations were primarily found to relate to operational constraints of a partially worked quarry, potential visibility of operations and quarry faces, operational and safety considerations, and provision of suitable and available restoration material. 4.3.2 The Proposed Development has had the following impact avoidance and reduction measures incorporated to mitigate adverse landscape and visual effects:
- Phasing Operations to work and restore the more visible areas early on, allowing lower, less visible areas to be worked later, ensuring that the highest and south-facing parts of the operational quarry are restored as early as possible, coupled with the reduction in height of Tip 3.
- Providing a landform which is more characteristic of the Limestone Dales (to which the Site more appropriately corresponds, rather than the Limestone Plateau Pastures LCT within which it currently lies) and removing prominent unnatural landforms (e.g. Tip 3, as seen from the east) that would otherwise remain.
- Maintaining as much existing mature/semi-mature tree/woodland vegetation where appropriate and possible to do so, to minimise adverse effects on the skyline and contribute to screening from lower lying positions.
- Restoring areas and providing aftercare progressively, at the earliest stage and managing thereafter to promote quick establishment and good growth to provide:
- Screening of certain features (e.g. unavoidable sharp changes in slope (faces/benches));
- Enhanced, more characteristic landscape elements and habitat corridors; and
- Removal of ‘bare ground’ from the landscape as soon as possible, reducing the operational ‘land-take’.
4.4 EFFECTS ON LANDSCAPE CHARACTERISTICS AND CHARACTER
4.4.1 Effects on the landscape can apply at an individual level (e.g. to specific landscape elements or characteristics) and at the landscape character level. Effects on Landscape Characteristics can be direct (e.g. removing woodland) or indirect (e.g. by changing visual openness that may be contributing to an overall landscape character away from the source of the effect) and may have an overall effect on landscape character.
4.4.2 Important or Significant changes to landscape character occur when the relative level of contribution of the existing key characteristics changes (either through reduction/increase or removal/addition) such that the landscape would be defined or classified differently at a given geographical scale. The assessment of this is informed by considering the interaction of landscape sensitivity and magnitude of different effects.
4.4.3 Landscape Value (see Section 2.9) is High in the immediate vicinity of the Site and the Site is of Low Landscape Value (albeit being within the National Park – a Very High level individual Landscape Value aspect).
4.4.4 Based on Table Ap12 the Landscape Susceptibility of the Site to the Proposed Development is considered to be Medium, i.e. Landscape characteristics have a degree of susceptibility to change; but there is good scope to replace these elements without adversely affecting the character (and improving it for the Very Long term). There is distinguishable landscape structure, but with the Site, against the baseline, there are no significant features worthy of conservation; and some are detracting features. 4.4.5 Based on Table Ap12, the Landscape Susceptibility of the Locality to the Proposed Development is considered to be **High**, i.e. Landscape characteristics are susceptible to change and fairly difficult to mitigate without affecting the existing character. The area is typically of recognisable landscape structure with features worthy of conservation, detracted in part by the presence of the existing quarry.
4.4.6 The determination of Landscape Sensitivity is guided by Table Ap13, reproduced below:
| Land. Value | Very Low | Low | Medium | High | Very High | |-------------|----------|-----|--------|------|-----------| | Very Low | Very Low | Very Low | Low | Low or Medium | Medium | | Low | Very Low | Low | Low or Medium | Medium | Medium or High | | Medium | Low | Low or Medium | Medium | Medium or High | High | | High | Low or Medium | Medium | Medium or High | High | Very High | | Very High | Medium | Medium or High | High | Very High | Very High |
4.4.7 The Landscape Sensitivity of the locality to the Proposed Development is considered to be **High**. The landscape sensitivity of the Site to the Proposed Development is considered to be **Low or Medium**.
4.4.8 The determination of magnitude of landscape effect is guided by Table Ap13, as reproduced below.
| Magnitude of Landscape Effect | Landscape Criteria | |------------------------------|---------------------| | Very Large | Typically, large scale changes and/or numerous changes to important landscape characteristics | | Large | Typically, large scale changes to some landscape characteristics, or a high number of medium scale changes to the landscape characteristics | | Medium | Typically, some medium scale changes to some landscape characteristics | | Small | Typically, a low number of medium scale changes to landscape characteristics, or a number of small scale changes to landscape characteristics | | Very Small | Typically, occasional, small scale changes to unimportant landscape characteristics |
4.4.9 The magnitude of change is considered in the context of an existing operational quarry, i.e. the Proposed Development comprises changes to the working and restoration scheme and is not a wholly new development or an extension into ‘virgin’ ground outside the planning boundary. The phased nature of the Proposed Development is such that there is a progressive change from operational areas to restored areas. The effects have been considered, below, during the Operational Period and then after operations and restoration has been completed (i.e. during the subsequent (residual) period).
**Operational Period**
4.4.10 The Proposed Development alters the way the Site is worked but does not extend the life or the operational land-take, at any moment in time, of the consented development. Certain landscape elements will change from the consented scheme, notably the landform and (temporarily) the land cover at Tip 3.
4.4.11 The change to this landform in the Proposed Development is of note, due to the reduction in levels, the change in slope angle and the overall form that would be created by its partial removal. The reduction in height of the slope will be coupled with a reduction in semi-mature (circa 20-year old) planted woodland (to be partially replanted). This will reduce the apparent backdrop and skyline to existing landscapes being appreciated to the south; these could be considered beneficial aspects, reducing the apparent amount of woodland, keeping a lower, but similar wooded style of skyline and removing some uncharacteristic landforms from view, especially apparent during the winter. The visual containment afforded by woodland/landform in combination would reduce slightly, being more in keeping with that of the adjacent areas, being transitional between the limestone upland plateau and limestone dales.
4.4.12 The level of tranquillity afforded at the Site and immediate areas will reduce marginally during the Operational Period when working in the area of Tip 3. The Proposed Development (operations) will be a partially characteristic element of the existing landscape (due to the existing quarry) but creating a different adverse effect (altered areas of quarrying, temporary landform change and removal of woodland). Once completed, the landform changes will be considered to be beneficial overall, with adverse effects decreasing as new restored landscape elements establish and develop - present for a Very Long term duration. Overall, on balance, the magnitude of adverse effect of the Proposed Development on the landscape character of the immediate locality is, during the operational period, considered to generally be Very Small but rising to Small when experienced, indirectly from specific areas (notably higher land to the southeast of Ballidon, within the Village Farmlands and Shale Ridges LCT).
Restoration and Aftercare (Residual) Period
4.4.13 The landform will be permanently altered, creating a new landform over the approved situation, in the landscape, which would be appreciable from a small number of close and medium-range locations. The changes will be largely beneficial due to the revised restoration proposals responding to the landscape guidelines for the character areas, responding to views afforded from key viewpoints (e.g. strategic woodland planting to mitigate residual quarry faces/benches) and generally producing slopes more in keeping with the locality, sat between limestone uplands plateau and limestone dales.
4.4.14 There will be a reduction in the number and lengths of quarry faces/benches retained upon restoration, replaced with slopes generally of no steeper gradient than are naturally found immediately adjacent to the Site, thus partially reflecting its landscape character. The revised shape of the water body, whilst covering approximately the same area, is less natural, with straighter quarry face edges present at the water’s edge, although neither would be apparent from outside the Site.
4.4.15 The Tip 3 area will be replanted with broadleaved woodland, using species more in keeping with those found naturally in the landscape (see restoration proposals), maintaining the wooded boundary between the lower valleys and the transition to limestone dales and limestone uplands plateau (and the change in character to the restored quarry). The main quarry area (West Quarry) will change to contain a higher proportion of calcareous grassland, for sheep grazing, with a reduction in woodland, but with areas of woodland and scrub retained for structure, to help integrate quarry faces/benches into the landscape and to provide habitat ‘stepping stones’ and continuity to those outside of the Site. Incongruous elements on the approved restoration scheme (e.g. large areas of willow carr and general preponderance of woodland) are not included in the Proposed Development.
4.4.16 Overall, on balance, the magnitude of beneficial effect of the Proposed Development on the landscape character of the immediate locality, upon restoration, is considered to be Small - Medium.
4.4.17 The derivation of levels of importance of effect generally follows a pattern by which the relationship between sensitivity and magnitude contributes to the level of effect as shown diagrammatically below. On balance, in overall planning terms, Important of Significant effects may not necessarily be considered unacceptable. The principles set out in the diagram below and Table Ap14 (see Appendix 1) have been used to guide the assessment on significance of direct and indirect effects on the landscape.
4.4.18 The direct and indirect (overall adverse) effect on landscape characteristics during the Operational Period are considered to generally be of Minor-Moderate Significance, within and outwith the Site, having some effect on the landscape characteristics and landscape character without exceeding the landscape capacity threshold. Key characteristics would be retained and not affected to a Significant or notable degree.
4.4.19 For a Medium-term duration an adverse landscape effect of a Moderate level of Significance will be experienced from a specific area of the Village Farmlands and Shale Ridges LCT, due to the relative proximity and contribution that the presence of the woodland on the Tip 3 area makes to the character context, when experienced from specific elevated locations to the southeast of the Site, where, even though quarry operations would have exerted an influence in the past, the influence of the existing and consented quarry on this area is currently very small (see Viewpoint 7).
4.4.20 Generally, upon establishment of the restoration, there will be an enhancement with regards to the landscape characteristics within the Site overall and as experienced in the wider landscape context. The reconfigured landform, land-use and habitats are elements that are more characteristic in the natural area and so will be considered to have a positive effect. The positive effects will strengthen with time as the landscape elements mature.
4.4.21 The (overall) beneficial residual effect on the landscape characteristics at the Site is considered to be of Minor-Moderate significance overall for the Site itself and of Moderate significance in the wider landscape context, where there will be wider improvements experienced in landscape character terms, within a National Park area, and beyond. Again, there would be some effect on the landscape characteristics and landscape character without exceeding the landscape capacity threshold. Key characteristics would be retained and enhanced but not affected to a Significant or notable degree. Table 5 Summary of Assessment of Significance of Landscape Effects
| | Site Only (Direct effects) | Locality (Indirect effects) | |--------------------------------|-----------------------------|-----------------------------| | Landscape Sensitivity | Low - Medium | High | | Operational Period Magnitude of overall effect | Small Adverse | Generally Very Small Adverse overall magnitude | | Operational Period – Significance of Landscape Effects | Minor-Moderate (of adverse effect) | Generally Minor-Moderate, where experienced Specific effect experienced from part of Village Farmlands and Shale Ridges (SE of Ballidon) – Moderate (of adverse effect) | | Residual Period Magnitude of overall effect | Small-Medium Beneficial | Small Beneficial | | Residual Period – Significance of Landscape Effects | Minor-Moderate (of beneficial effect) | Moderate (of beneficial effect) |
Cumulative Landscape Effects
4.4.22 The local landscape has historically been quarried with some (more distant)sites still being active and including many smaller areas which have been restored or have become self-established and naturalised to some degree. The Proposed Development does not extend the life, geographical extent overall or land-take at any moment of time beyond that currently consented. Consequently, no Significant cumulative landscape effects are anticipated.
4.5 EFFECTS ON VISUAL AMENITY
4.5.1 The presentation of the assessment of visual effects has focused on representative viewpoints which represent a range of sensitive locations with the potential to be affected to a significant level.
4.5.2 Twelve Viewpoints have been selected to best represent the range of sensitive viewpoint locations and main effects within the ZTV, and are illustrated using photographs and photomontages in Figures L3 to L16.
4.5.3 Close range views are taken to be from viewpoints within 0.5km, Medium-range views from between 0.5 and 1.5km and Long-range views from over 1.5km from the Site. The criteria for Sensitivity of visual receptors is provided in Table Ap15, as reproduced below: | Visual Sensitivity | Value and Susceptibility to Change Criteria | Typical Receptor Types/Locations | |-------------------|--------------------------------------------|---------------------------------| | Very High | Nationally well recognised and advertised location for high visual amenity **value**\
Prominent location or vista with high visual amenity **value** that is recognised in published sources.\
Very high **susceptibility to change** as a very high level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | Nationally promoted Long Distance Footpath users.\
Protected View recognised in planning policy designation.\
Visitors to nationally advertised attractions where visual amenity is very important to their enjoyment.\
Private views from primary living space regularly used in daylight hours where the focus is on a landscape of recognised very high value. | | High | Well-known area recognised regionally for high landscape **value**.\
Open areas of recognised public access where primary enjoyment is of the views of the landscape.\
High **susceptibility to change** as a high level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | Users of local advertised circular, recreational or well-used footpath routes and open access land where primary enjoyment is from the landscape and visual amenity.\
Road and rail users on routes through landscapes recognised for their high scenic value.\
Private views from areas of a property curtilage occasionally used in daylight hours, e.g. access drives, where the focus is on the landscape beyond private curtilage. | | Medium | Locations afford views of some **value**, but visual amenity not well recognised beyond locality.\
Moderate **susceptibility to change** as a moderate level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | General recognised public access routes (road and rail routes) with some landscape interest.\
Public houses, restaurants etc. where views would include some focus on the wider landscape.\
Views from recreational sport areas which may involve some incidental appreciation of views of the wider landscape, e.g. golf or fishing.\
Private views from residential properties from rooms not normally occupied in waking or daylight hours, e.g. bedrooms. | | Low | Viewpoint context and location is of lesser **value** than similar views from nearby visual receptors that may be more accessible.\
Low **susceptibility to change** as low level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | Views from recreational sport areas which does not involve or depend upon appreciation of views of the landscape, e.g. football, rugby, speedway.\
Minor road routes where passengers would have limited focus on a landscape of no recognised value.\
People at their places of work where the main focus is not on the surrounding landscape context. | | Very Low | Viewpoint context is such that views have a very low **value**.\
Expectations of visual amenity are very low.\
Activity at viewpoint is incidental to the view. | People at their place of work where there the type of activity has no relationship to the surrounding landscape context. |
4.5.4 The representative viewpoint locations are shown on Figure L2 and listed in Table 6 together with an indication of the receptor groups represented, their distance from the Site (range) and the visual sensitivity of these receptors.
### Table 6 Summary Visual Sensitivity of Receptors at Viewpoints (VPs)
| Viewpoint No. | Location Description | Main Receptors Represented | Range | Sensitivity | |---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------|---------|-------------| | 1 | On southern Site boundary, on public highway near entrance to the Site and Footpath FPS. | Footpath users | Close | Medium | | 2 | 150m east of the Site on elevated Access Land. | Access Land users | Close | Medium | | 3 | 240m northeast of the Site on elevated Access Land. | Access Land users | Close | Medium | | 4 | 700m east-northeast of the Site from Pennine Bridleway. | Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users | Medium | Very High | | 5 | 900m northwest of Site on public footpath FP12. | Footpath users | Medium | Medium-High | | 6 | 600m south of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. | Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users | Medium | Very High | | 7 | 630m south-southeast of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. | Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users | Medium | Very High | | 8 | 800m southwest of the Site on footpath FP9 at edge of Parwich village. | Road users | Medium | Very High | | 9 | 1.47km southwest of the Site on elevated section of Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. | Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users | Medium | Very High | | 10 | 1.52km south of the Site on local road. | Road users | Long | Medium | | 11 | 2.59km south-southwest on elevated section of Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway. | Long Distance Footpath / Bridleway users | Long | Very High | | 12 | 2.31km south of the Site from footpath FP18, near Bradbourne village (outside National Park) | Footpath users | Long | Medium |
Note: All distances are from the location of where the photograph was taken to the Site, not from the façade of the nearest dwelling house for example.
4.5.5 The assessment of visual effects uses professional judgement to ascertain levels of Significance through levels of contribution of sensitivity (as described above), magnitude and nature of effect. The Magnitude of effect is provided in Table Ap16, as reproduced for convenience below.
### Magnitude of Visual Effect
| Magnitude of Visual Effect | Visual Criteria | |---------------------------|-----------------| | Very Large | Where the proposals become the only dominant feature in the view and to which all other elements become subordinate. Typically involves direct views at close range over a wide horizontal and vertical extent. | | Large | Where the proposals would form a significant and immediately apparent element of the scene and would affect the overall impression of the view. Typically involves direct or oblique views at close range with notable changes over the horizontal and vertical extent. | | Medium | Where proposals would form a visible and recognisable new development but where it is not intrusive within the overall view. Typically involves direct or oblique views at medium range with a moderate horizontal and/or vertical extent of the view affected. | | Small | Where proposals constitute only a minor component of the wider view, which the casual observer could miss or where awareness does not affect the overall quality of the scene. Typically involves an oblique view at medium or long range or a direct view at long range with a small horizontal/vertical extent of the view affected. | | Very Small | Where only a very small part of the development is discernible or that it is at such a distance that the effects are scarcely appreciated. |
#### 4.5.6
The derivation of levels of effect (indicating their importance or significance) generally follows a pattern by which the relationship between sensitivity and magnitude contributes to the level of effect as shown diagrammatically below. This process is applied to the selected representative viewpoints. On balance, in overall planning terms, Important or Significant effects may not necessarily be considered unacceptable.
#### Assessment from Viewpoint 1
**Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 1**
#### 4.5.7
Viewpoint 1 is on the southern boundary of the Site on a public highway and adjacent to public footpath FP5; see Figure L3. The view represents those obtained by highways and footpath users (the main represented visual receptors), i.e. provides transient views, within the National Park, immediately adjacent to the existing quarry entrance. These visual receptors are of **Medium** sensitivity.
#### 4.5.8
The view takes in close range views of the quarry entrance, associated buildings and vehicle parking space as well as areas of semi-mature broadleaved woodland, within and immediately adjacent to the Site. There are no long distance views beyond the existing quarry and woodland, the viewpoint being relatively low-lying to the Tip 3 area, on which woodland forms much of the skyline backdrop to the view.
4.5.9 The only noticeable changes brought by the Proposed Development in this view is the removal of the existing skyline, through reduction in height of the southern bund and associated removal of woodland in those areas. The interlying woodland would screen the actual ground works from view, the only noticeable difference being the change in the skyline. The skyline would remain as being comprised by retained woodland during the Operational Period. The magnitude of change in the view would be Very Small and the nature of the effect would be adverse, reducing the visible woodland in the view. The adverse individual visual effect, during the Operational Period is of Minor significance for footpath users.
4.5.10 Upon restoration, once established, the woodland be reinstated such that there would be no discernible changes in view from that which currently forms the consented baseline (approved restoration).
Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 1
4.5.11 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 1.
Assessment from Viewpoint 2
Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 2
4.5.12 Viewpoint 2 is located 150m east of the Site, on elevated Access Land; see Figure L4. The view represents those obtained by users of two areas of Access Land to the east of the Site (one Close range, another Medium range) and potentially from a farm property/buildings/residence lying between the areas of Access Land (not able to be accessed for the assessment). The views in towards the Site rely on being on high-lying areas (more elevated areas) of land, and from close-range would rely on users actively seeking out the highest points to gain views. These visual receptors are of Medium sensitivity.
4.5.13 The existing view is dominated by the existing quarry, including the bare mineral, processing plant and buildings, mounds of mineral and conveyors etc. Woodbarn Quarry is also partially visible (largely quarry faces) in the wider view. In the foreground, the land falls away steeply such that it is essentially overlooked, but comprises calcareous grassland scrub. The backdrop to the view comprises of a mixture of woodland and grassland fields. The Site does not breach the skyline from this location. Tip 3 is viewed ‘side-on’ from this location and takes the form of a sharp-edged ridge, with steep slopes and is partially wooded and partially grassed. The Tip is a detracting element of the view.
4.5.14 The Proposed Development would be largely visible in the view from this location, as would be the consented development. During the Operational Period, the main changes to the consented development relate to the area of Tip 3. The Proposed Development would see the sharp ridge feature reduced in height, with a small apparent amount of woodland also removed, the retained slope being much less prominent and the quarry faces moving back (southwards, further left into the view) – a beneficial effect once completed. The retained landform immediately beyond the main processing building would screen much of the working on the western side of the Tip 3 area. The northwestern, upper slopes would be restored early in the scheme, reducing the amount of open faces visible from this location and replacing with calcareous grassland in the view – a beneficial effect once in place. Few discernible changes from the consented situation would be evident in Woodbarn Quarry from this location during the Operational Period. The skyline would remain unchanged during the Operational Period. The magnitude of any adverse change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period would be Small. The adverse individual visual effect, during the Operational Period is of Minor-Moderate significance.
4.5.15 Upon restoration, once established, the changes in the view would be provide permanent improvements over the consented situation, including:
- Substantially fewer visible restoration faces in both quarry areas;
- A less visually prominent landform at Tip 3;
- A visible landform more in keeping with those outwith the Site but within the view; and
- Land-use/habitats more congruous with adjacent areas, with increased grassland and less apparent woodland.
These effects would be evident for a Very Long term duration and would be of Medium magnitude over the consented restoration. The beneficial individual visual effect, during the Restoration Period is of Moderate significance.
Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 2
4.5.16 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 2.
Assessment from Viewpoint 3
Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 3
4.5.17 Viewpoint 3 is located 240m northeast of the Site on elevated Access Land; see Figure L5. It is representative of Close-range views from an area of Access Land and of the direction of view, from Medium range, beyond from the Pennine Bridleway National Trail, e.g. near Daisy Bank (see ‘Other Viewpoints’ below. The views in towards the Site from the Access Land rely on being on high-lying areas (more elevated areas) of land and would rely on users actively seeking out the highest points to gain views. These visual receptors are of Medium sensitivity.
4.5.18 The existing view is, similarly to Viewpoint 2, dominated by the existing quarry, but primarily with the bare mineral, mounds of mineral and quarry faces etc. forming the key components of the view. Woodbarn Quarry is also partially visible (largely upper quarry faces), with this being nearer to the viewpoint than the main quarry area (West Quarry), but being substantially screened by interlying land. Again, similarly to Viewpoint 2, in the foreground, the land falls away steeply such that it is essentially overlooked, but comprises calcareous grassland scrub. The backdrop to the view again comprises of a mixture of woodland and grassland fields, although the backdrop does extend a substantial distance compared to that seen from Viewpoint 2. The Site does not breach the skyline from this location but Tip 3 is a prominent and detracting element of the view.
4.5.19 Land lying on the eastern part of the northern boundary of the main West Quarry area (south of the eastern part of the Woodbarn Quarry area) is currently being raised and restored, in line with the consented scheme and this will continue, forming Phase 1 of the Proposed Development, such that the levels will raise over 10m and help to screen much of the internal area of the West Quarry part of the Site. The removal of the majority of Tip 3, as part of the Proposed Development, will form the biggest change over the consented scheme. The operations to undertake this will be visible for Short-term before much of the working below the tip would take place, largely out of view. Woodland planting, undertaken as part of the restoration, on the interlying restored ridge landform, will maximise screening potential.
4.5.20 The Proposed Development would see the Tip 3 sharp ridge feature reduced in height, allowing more distant views over the backdrop landscape, with a very small apparent amount of woodland also removed. The retained slope will be much less prominent and the quarry faces largely out of view – beneficial effects, once completed. The remaining mineral working would be largely as per the consented situation and the skyline would remain unchanged. The magnitude of any adverse change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period would be Small-Medium. The adverse individual visual effect, during the Operational Period is of Moderate significance.
4.5.21 Upon restoration, once established, the changes in the view would provide permanent improvements over the consented situation, including fewer visible restoration faces in both quarry areas and a less visually prominent landform in the Tip 3 area. These effects would be evident for a Very Long term duration and would be of Small magnitude over the consented restoration. The beneficial individual visual effect, during the Restoration Period is of Minor - Moderate significance.
Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 3
4.5.22 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 3.
Assessment from Viewpoint 4
Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 4
4.5.23 Viewpoint 4 is located 700m east-northeast of the Site from Pennine Bridleway; see Figure L6. It is representative of medium-range views from the Pennine Bridleway recreational route within the National Park; views that are very restricted in number. These visual receptors are of Very High sensitivity.
4.5.24 The viewpoint provides an intermediate direction of view to Viewpoints 2 and 3, but from a greater distance. The existing view is panoramic, taking in a large area of countryside, with pasture fields forming the foreground, the Ballidon Quarry part of the Site forming a large proportion of the mid-ground and dales, ridges and plateau areas with a combination of trees and fields forming the backdrop. Woodbarn Quarry is virtually screened from view at this location. The Site does not breach the skyline from this location and Tip 3 is markedly less prominent in the view from this location compared to that seen from Viewpoints 2 and 3. The increased distance from the Site reduces the resolvable detail and therefore higher contrast elements are more easily distinguished. At the Site, this relates to existing bare ground and mineral and the sharp changes in slope (e.g. quarry faces/benches) in contrast to vegetated areas, which blend into the wider scene unobtrusively.
4.5.25 The Proposed Development would see Tip 3 reduced in height, exposing additional mineral in the view for a Medium-term duration, viewed obliquely, limiting the lateral extent of the additional area in the view. The early restoration of the northwest corner of the Ballidon Quarry part of the Site will reduce some of the exposed mineral and steep slopes that would otherwise be present in the view as part of the consented development. The remaining mineral working would be largely as per the consented situation and the skyline would remain unchanged. The magnitude of any adverse change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period would be Small. The adverse individual visual effect, during the Operational Period, given the Very High sensitivity of the visual receptor, is of Moderate-Major significance.
4.5.26 Upon restoration, once established, the changes in the view would provide permanent improvements over the consented situation, including fewer visible restoration faces in both quarry areas and a more characteristic landform at Tip 3 and in the northwestern/northern part of West Quarry. These effects would be evident for a Very Long term duration and would be of Very Small magnitude over the consented restoration. The beneficial individual visual effects, given the Very High sensitivity of the visual receptor, during the Restoration Period, is of Moderate significance.
4.5.27 Overall, given the limited duration of adverse effects, the very low number of available viewpoints represented at this location and the permanent improvements to the view brought about by the restoration scheme changes, the effects are not considered to be Significant.
Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 4
4.5.28 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 4.
Assessment from Viewpoint 5
Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 5
4.5.29 Viewpoint 5 is located 900m northwest of Site on public footpath FP12; see Figure L7. It is representative of a restricted number of Medium-range views from higher land to the northwest (footpath users, on linked routes, within the National Park). These visual receptors are of Medium-High sensitivity.
4.5.30 The existing view comprises open countryside, largely grassland fields, with occasional woodland, over a plateau area with visible shallow dales in the near view, becoming more undulating into the distance. The wind farm at Carsington Pastures is also visible in the distance. Much of the Site is screened from view, although small areas of quarry face, the tops of the main processing building and the highest parts of Tip 3 are able to be made out, without being readily noticeable. Woodland, just outside the western edge of the Site, screens most of the Tip 3 area.
4.5.31 The Proposed Development would see the visible part of Tip 3 removed from view. Farmland beyond would take its place during the Operational Period. Upon restoration, some woodland may be visible. The magnitude of change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period and Restoration Period would be Very Small and the effects largely neutral. The visual effects on this viewpoint are therefore of Minor significance.
Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 5
4.5.32 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 5. Assessment from Viewpoint 6
Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 6
4.5.33 Viewpoint 6 is located 600m south of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway; see Figure L8. It is representative of Medium-range views from near Ballidon village on a long distance recreational route, at a low-lying location, with the Site forming the skyline. These visual receptors are of Very High sensitivity. Residents at Ballidon village are likely to have more restricted views towards the Site, but will experience similar views accessing their properties via the public highway.
4.5.34 The view takes in ridge and furrow farmland in the foreground, parts of Ballidon village in the mid-ground, together with narrow belts of woodland and farmland forming the sides to a dale in the background. The background is relatively near to the viewpoint (no distant backdrop is visible) with landform being the main constraint. This raised landform is partly natural, leading up to the plateau area beyond and with rocky limestone outcrops visible also in the right hand side of the view, and partly of man-made landform: Tip 3. This is largely obscured by planted woodland which is now well-established. Tip 3 forms much of the skyline, softened slightly by the outline of the woodland.
4.5.35 The Proposed Development would see Tip 3 reduced in height, retaining interlying woodland in place. This, in combination with the residual landform in the Tip 3 area, post working, would prevent views beyond into the Site; see Figure L9. The works involved to remove the tip will initially involve removal of the woodland and subsequent lowering of the landform. Vehicles and a changing landform will be visible for a Short-term duration. The magnitude of any adverse change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period would be Small-Medium. The adverse individual visual effect, during the Operational Period, given the Very High sensitivity of the recreational footpath visual receptor, is of Moderate-Major significance.
4.5.36 Upon restoration, once established, the changes over the consented situation would be of Very Small magnitude, lowering the landform slightly, but with new woodland gradually creating a very similar effect to that consented. These effects are at worst neutral, but potentially beneficial, creating a slightly less visually enclosed effect. The individual visual effect, given the Very High sensitivity of the visual receptor, during the Restoration Period, is of Minor significance.
4.5.37 Overall, given the limited duration of adverse effects and the low number of affected viewpoints represented at this location, the effects are not considered to be Significant.
Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 6
4.5.38 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 6.
Assessment from Viewpoint 7
Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 7
4.5.39 Viewpoint 7 is located 630m south-southeast of the Site on the Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway; see Figure L10. It is representative of Medium-range views from circa 250m stretch of a long distance recreational route, from an elevated position to south-southeast. The viewpoint is at a similar elevation to Tip 3 and views towards the Site would be predominantly taken in by users heading west (eastbound users having to stop and turn around to take in the view). The represented visual receptors are of Very High sensitivity.
4.5.40 The view takes in a rolling rural landform comprising of a variety of elements including farmland, woodland, rocky outcrops, farm buildings and stored materials (detracting elements) and houses at Ballidon and includes Tip 3, which lies very close to the skyline. The wider view to the southwest takes in more distant views of the landscape, but towards the Site and beyond, the backdrop is largely limited to the nearest slopes rising up to the plateau area. The main quarry area is currently out of view. The 2 wind turbines at Hilltop Farm are visible on the skyline.
4.5.41 The Proposed Development would see Tip 3 reduced in height, removing woodland from the view, introducing bare mineral and earth moving operations into a small portion of the view for a Short-term duration. The limited duration of the operations is the key mitigation from this viewpoint. The replacement in the view, for Tip 3, from this location, will be the restored slopes in the northwest corner of the Site and previously restored and vegetated benches on the western edge of West Quarry. The retained part of the Southern bund will provide some retained screening. The magnitude of any adverse change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period would be Medium. The adverse individual visual effect, during the Operational Period, given the Very High sensitivity of the visual receptor and limited duration and length of path affected, is of Moderate-Major significance.
4.5.42 Upon restoration, once established, the changes over the consented situation would be of Very Small magnitude, lowering the landform slightly, but with new woodland gradually creating a very similar effect to that consented. The effect will be adverse, however, as the landform visible beyond will take in a small section of quarry faces. The individual visual effect, given the Very High sensitivity of the visual receptor, during the Restoration Period, is of Moderate significance.
4.5.43 Overall, adverse effects on this specific viewpoint, a short stretch of a recreational path largely for westbound users, are borderline Significant. The adverse effects are Significant for Phase 2 only. Thereafter the visual effects are not considered to be Significant.
Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 7
4.5.44 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 7.
Assessment from Viewpoint 8
Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 8
4.5.45 Viewpoint 8 is located 800m southwest of the Site on footpath FP9 at edge of Parwich village; see Figure L11. It is representative of Medium-range views from the junction between a minor road (Monsdale Lane) and a public footpath near edge of residential area. The visual receptors include residents, users of the highway and users of the public footpath, and nearby Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway in the National Park. The long distance bridleway users are of Very High sensitivity.
4.5.46 The view takes in a rural scene comprising a dale with a wooded valley side to the north (left) and grassland with scrub and trees with stone wall field boundaries in the remaining parts of the view. Trees largely form the skyline, including a very small part which is contributed by trees on the Tip 3 area. No other part of the Site is visible.
4.5.47 The Proposed Development would see only the smallest part of woodland within the Site removed from view, replaced by sky. The magnitude of change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period and Restoration Period would be Very Small and the effects neutral. The visual effects on this viewpoint are therefore of Negligible significance.
Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 8
4.5.48 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 8.
Assessment from Viewpoint 9
Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 9
4.5.49 Viewpoint 9 is located 1.47km southwest of the Site on elevated section of Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway; see Figure L12. It is representative of Medium-range view from long distance recreational route with pleasant views over Parwich. The represented visual receptors are of Very High sensitivity.
4.5.50 The view creates a highly scenic effect with a diverse and balanced set of pleasing elements in the view, including the characteristic buildings of Parwich, broadleaved woodland, rocky outcrops, woodland copse hilltop focal point, grassed fields with tree and shrub boundary vegetation in the fore and mid ground and more ‘wild’ plateau grassland beyond. The Site is essentially hidden from view and woodland on Tip 3 is the only contributing element to the scene.
4.5.51 The Proposed Development would see only the smallest part of woodland within the Site removed from view, replaced by grassland on the limestone plateau beyond. The magnitude of change in the view, from the consented situation during the Operational Period and Restoration Period would be Very Small and the effects neutral. The visual effects on this viewpoint are therefore of Negligible significance.
Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 9
4.5.52 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 9.
Assessment from Viewpoint 10
Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 10
4.5.53 Viewpoint 10 is located 1.52km south of the Site on local road; see Figure L13. It is representative of Long-range views from the broad valley to the south of the Site, within the National Park, from roads and dispersed residences, with the Site forming the skyline. These visual receptors are of Medium (road users) and High (Residents) sensitivity.
4.5.54 The view takes in farmland in the foreground, with interlying trees present along field boundaries, interrupting the view in the background of higher land (woodland and grassland) partially comprising Tip 3. Some minor detracting elements in the view exist (e.g. telegraph poles/lines) and a small part of the quarry is visible (including the main processing plant building).
4.5.55 The Proposed Development would see Tip 3 reduced in height with machinery and regarding works likely to be visible but not noticeably evident, replacing the skyline with a marginally lower wooded skyline. No additional views into the quarry would be gained. Upon restoration, woodland would re-establish and reinforce this skyline. The changes over the consented situation would be of Very Small magnitude, lowering the landform slightly, but with new woodland gradually creating a very similar effect to that consented. These effects are at worst neutral, but potentially beneficial, creating a slightly less visually enclosed effect. The individual visual effects are of Negligible significance.
Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 10
4.5.56 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 10.
Assessment from Viewpoint 11
Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 11
4.5.57 Viewpoint 11 is located 2.59km south-southwest on elevated section of Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway; see Figure L14. It is representative of Long-range views from a long distance recreational route in the National Park, from an elevated position to the south-southwest. The visual receptors are of Very High sensitivity.
4.5.58 The view is panoramic and far-reaching, taking in large areas of undulating countryside, with valleys and plateau areas visible. Occasional wooded highpoints form focal points (e.g. Minninglow Hill). The scene is one of a mixture of grassland and woodland with numerous scattered trees and occasional areas of settlement visible, without being prominent. The Site forms a very small, inconspicuous part of the scene, being almost completely hidden from view, except for the wooded Southern Tip Area.
4.5.59 The Proposed Development would see Tip 3 marginally reduced in height producing a marginally lower wooded area in that part of the view. No additional views into the quarry would be gained and operations to lower the tip area would not be readily discernible from this distance. Upon restoration, woodland would re-establish, but with minimal effect over the consented situation. The changes over the consented situation would be of Very Small magnitude, essentially neutral in nature and the individual visual effects are of Minor significance for the visual receptors of Very High sensitivity at this location.
Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 11
4.5.60 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 11.
Assessment from Viewpoint 12
Individual Visual Effects on Viewpoint 12
4.5.61 Viewpoint 12 is located 2.31km south of the Site from footpath FP18, near Bradbourne village (outside National Park); see Figure L15. It is representative of Long-range views from a public footpath, from an elevated position to the south also representing views from a small number of residences facing the Site at Bradbourne. The visual receptors are of Medium (footpath users) and High (residents) sensitivity.
4.5.62 The view covers a wide area and the Site forms a small proportion of the view and lies close to the horizon. The view takes in areas of agricultural land, farmsteads and settlements, with interspersed areas of woodland, some forming skyline features. Occasional detracting elements in the view include telegraph/electricity poles and overhead wires. Existing quarry benches are readily visible in the scene (from Woodbarn Quarry), and Tip 3 is also visible, without being an obvious element in the view.
4.5.63 The Proposed Development would see Tip 3 marginally reduced in height producing a marginally lower wooded area in that part of the view. The actual operations would not be readily visible due to the distance of the viewpoint from the works, but the exposed material may increase the contrast with adjacent vegetation, making the area slightly more evident in the view for a Short-term duration. This part of the view would be replaced by restored grassland slopes on the northern and northwestern boundary of the Ballidon Quarry part of the Site (see Figure L16) undertaken during Phase 2. No additional views into the operational parts of the quarry would be gained.
4.5.64 Upon restoration, woodland would re-establish in the Tip 3 area but with minimal effect over the consented situation. Bench planting in Woodbarn Quarry would be undertaken, as per the consented situation to better integrate these into the view. The changes over the consented situation would be of Small magnitude and adverse in nature during Phase 1. Thereafter, effects would be neutral. The visual effects are of Minor-Moderate significance for the footpath users and of Moderate significance for residents.
Combined Cumulative Visual Effects on Viewpoint 12
4.5.65 There are no cumulative visual effects on Viewpoint 12.
4.6 EFFECTS ON OTHER VISUAL RECEPTORS
4.6.1 Views gained from other locations on the Pennine Bridleway are very restricted in number due to the banks, stone walls and route through areas of cutting. Views can be sought at locations such as Daisy Bank, where stone walls have gaps, and are represented by the similar view from Viewpoint 3 and partially by Viewpoint 4 (also from the Pennine Bridleway, circa 400m to the southeast). The views from the Pennine Bridleway are longer distance (Medium-range, whereas View point 3 is from a Close-range) but the Pennine Bridleway is from a slightly more elevated location. Consequently, a slightly smaller proportion of the view is affected by the Proposed Development from this location. Similar types of effects would be experienced from this location as to Viewpoint 3 and the assessment commentary for this and Viewpoint 4 apply to this location also. Moderate-Major significance of visual effects could be expected during the Operational Period and overall, given the limited duration of adverse effects, the very low number of available viewpoints and the permanent improvements to the view brought about by the restoration scheme changes, the effects are not considered to be Significant from this location.
4.6.2 Other Long-range views may be afforded from specific locations outside of the National Park to the east. Given the distance to the Site and the ability to discern specific operations taking place, the lateral views to Tip 3 and Short-term duration of the effects during Phase 1 the significance of any adverse effects (which are likely to generally be neutral) from these locations is expected to be Minor. 4.7 SEQUENTIAL CUMULATIVE IMPACTS
4.7.1 Given the distance to other quarries in the vicinity (likely to be 3km plus along routes) and the large choice of routes available to footpath and road users, no significant sequential cumulative visual impacts are anticipated for main routes through the area.
5 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
5.1 DESIGN AND ASSESSMENT
5.1.1 The design of the Proposed Development has undergone a series of changes to refine the proposals, with the aim of avoiding and minimising potentially significant landscape and visual effects and has been informed by local character assessments, biodiversity targets and local planning policy.
5.1.2 This has resulted in an iterative design and assessment process, using Chartered Landscape Architects following the latest best practice guidance, which looked at a variety of aspects, including extent of mineral extraction, phased working and restoration (considering the existing quarry constraints also) and available visual screening, restoration and afteruse design options.
5.1.3 The assessment aspect took into consideration the sensitivities of the landscape characteristics (within the Site and outwith the Site) and specifically of the National Park location and its landscape character and of visual receptors and their likely response to any changes in visual amenity.
5.2 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL EFFECTS
5.2.1 Adverse effects on landscape and visual receptors have been acknowledged during the assessment process.
5.2.2 During the Operational Period, the adverse effects on visual amenity are limited to a maximum level of Moderate-Major with many others of a much lower level. A number of beneficial visual effects will result over the consented scheme upon establishment of the restoration scheme, one of which will be of Moderate significance (Viewpoint 4). There will be an adverse visual effect on Viewpoint 7 upon restoration (of Moderate significance). None of these effects is considered to be Significant overall, although one viewpoint (Viewpoint 7) will experience a Significant effect for a Short-term duration during the Operational Period (Phase 2).
5.2.3 During the Operational Period, the adverse effects on the landscape resource are generally limited to a Minor-Moderate level, with a Moderate indirect landscape effect on the Village Farmlands and Shale Ridges LCT experienced from the vicinity of Viewpoint 7, to the southeast of the Site, during Phase 2. None of these effects is considered to be Significant.
5.2.4 Upon establishment of restoration, beneficial effects on landscape character will be experienced within and outwith the Site; these are of Minor-Moderate and Moderate significance respectively.
5.3 CONCLUSION
5.3.1 The Proposed Development (the Operational Period and the residual restoration) has been designed to meet the requirements of the specific policies relating to effects on the landscape and visual amenity in Section 2.1. Adverse and beneficial effects will result from the Proposed Development, with the numerous beneficial landscape and visual effects being experienced permanently and phased in progressively and the adverse effects being temporary in absolute terms. The creation of substantial areas of calcareous grassland (in lieu of incongruous wet woodland bench planting) complies with a key targets for the Limestone Dales LCT, where new native woodland is ‘generally not appropriate’. The Short-term duration of adverse effects could be considered, in overall terms, to at least be balanced out, and probably outweighed, by the permanent landscape and visual improvements that could be brought about by the Proposed Development to the Site and the surrounding area, in the National Park. REFERENCES:
- Christine Tudor (Natural England), 2014. *An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment*. s.l.:s.n.
- Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage, April 2002. *Landscape Character Assessment, Guidance for England and Scotland*. s.l.:s.n.
- Defra, 2010. *English National Parks and the Broads UK Government Vision and Circular 2010*. s.l.:s.n.
- Department for Communities and Local Government, 2012. *National Planning Policy Framework*. s.l.:s.n.
- Department for Communities and Local Government, n.d. *Guidance - Natural Environment: Landscape*. [Online] Available at: http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/blog/guidance/natural-environment/landscape/ [Accessed 16 February 2015].
- Landscape Institute, 2011. *Photography and Photomontage in Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (Advice Note 01/11)*. s.l.:s.n.
- MAFF, 1988. *Agricultural Land Classification of England and Wales - Revised Guidelines and Criteria for Grading the Quality of Agricultural Land*. s.l.:s.n.
- Natural England, 2012. *National Character Area Profile 67*, s.l.: s.n.
- Natural England, n.d. *Natural Areas - Midlands Plateau*. [Online] Available at: http://www.naturalareas.naturalengland.org.uk/Science/natural/NA_Details.asp?NA_ID=43&S=&R=5 [Accessed Oct 2014].
- Peak District National Park Authority and Countryside, 2009. *Peak District National Park Landscape Strategy and Action Plan 2009 – 2019 (Final Report)*. s.l.:s.n.
- Peak District National Park Authority, 2003. *Minerals Strategic Action Plan*. s.l.:s.n.
- Peak District National Park Authority, Adopted 2011. *Peak District National Park Local Development Framework - Core Strategy Development Plan Document*. s.l.:s.n.
- Peak District National Park Authority, n.d. *Peak District National Park Management Plan*. [Online] Available at: http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/microsites/nmpm [Accessed 16 February 2015].
- Peak District National Park, n.d. *Local Plan 2001*. [Online] Available at: http://www.peakdistrict.gov.uk/publications/local-plan-2001 [Accessed 16 February 2015].
- The Landscape Institute, 2013. *Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (Third Edition)*. In: s.l.:s.n. ABBREVIATIONS / ACRONYMS:
For the avoidance of confusion, abbreviations used have the meanings given below:
| Abbreviation | Meaning | |--------------|----------------------------------------------| | AGL | Above Ground Level | | AGLV | Area of Great Landscape Value | | AOD | Above Ordnance Datum | | AONB | Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty | | AVR | Accurate Visual Representation | | c. | Circa | | CoP | Code of Practice | | CWS | County Wildlife Site | | DEM | Digital Elevation Model | | DSM | Digital Surface Model | | DTM | Digital Terrain Model | | EA | Environment Agency | | FOV | Field of View | | GIS | Geographical Information System | | LCA | Landscape Character Area | | LCT | Landscape Character Type | | LNR | Local Nature Reserve | | LPA | Local Planning Authority | | LVA | Landscape and Visual Appraisal | | LVIA | Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment | | LWS | Local Wildlife Site | | MPA | Mineral Planning Authority | | NCA | National Character Area | | NGR | National Grid Reference | | NNR | National Nature Reserve | | NPPF | National Planning Policy Framework | | NPPG | National Planning Policy Guidance | | OS | Ordnance Survey | | PDL | Previously Developed Land | | PDNPA | Peak District National Park Authority | | POS | Public Open Space | | RCA | Regional Character Area | | RIGS | Regionally Important Geological Site | | SAC | Special Conservation Area | | SAM | Scheduled Ancient Monument | | SINC | Site of Importance for Nature Conservation | | SLINC | Site of Local Importance for Nature Conservation | | SSSI | Site of Special Scientific Interest | | TPO | Tree Preservation Order | | VEM | Visual Envelope Map | | ZVI | Zone of Visual Influence | | ZTV | Zone of Theoretical Visibility | | ZPV | Zone of Primary Visibility | | ZSV | Zone of Secondary Visibility | GLOSSARY:
For the avoidance of confusion, the terms used in this report follow the definitions given below:
**Landscape** An area, as perceived by people (in relation to past experiences, education etc.), whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors. Landscape may comprise areas of rural land, urban fringe, urban land (townscape), coastal land, the sea (seascape) etc.
**Townscape** The character and composition of the built environment including the buildings and the relationships between them, the different types of urban open space, including green spaces, and the relationship between buildings and open spaces.
**Seascape** Landscapes with views of the coast or seas, and coasts and adjacent marine environments with cultural, historical and archaeological links with each other.
**Landscape Element** A component part of the landscape (e.g. landform, roads, hedges, woods).
**Landscape Feature** A prominent eye-catching element (e.g. wooded hilltop or church spire).
**Landscape Characteristics** Combinations of elements and experiential characteristics (e.g. noise, smell) that make a particular contribution to a Landscape Character Type.
**Landscape Receptor** Defined aspects of the landscape that have the potential to be affected by a Proposed Development.
**Landscape Scene** The landscape characteristics discernible from a given viewpoint/location. The visual aspects of this can be illustrated in a static two-dimensional manner in photographs to represent a sample view of the landscape scene.
**Landscape Character** The distinct recognisable pattern of elements that occurs consistently in a particular landscape and how people perceive this, creating a particular sense of place.
**Landscape Character Types** LCTs refer to multiple areas of the same character.
**Landscape Character Areas** LCAs refer to specific geographical locations of a particular character type. These can be described and categorised at different scales depending on criteria used.
**Landscape Condition** The strength of expression of landscape character and intactness of constituent characteristic elements from visual, functional, ecological and cultural perspectives. This is not the same as Scenic Beauty.
**Landscape Capacity** The threshold at which change to the landscape resource results in significant change to its landscape character. This is directly related to landscape sensitivity.
**Landscape Susceptibility** The ability of a defined landscape receptor (e.g. landscape characteristics) to accommodate the specific Proposed Development without undue negative consequences.
**Landscape Value** The desirability of landscape characteristics (including scenic beauty, tranquillity, wildness, cultural associations, conservation interests etc.) and the acceptability of their loss to different stakeholders (i.e. valued for different reasons by different people and on different scales, e.g. local, national).
**Landscape Sensitivity** The level of stability, robustness and resilience of landscape receptors and their ability to be replicated based on their quality, condition and value. Landscape sensitivity is based on a combination of judgements on landscape susceptibility and landscape value.
**Landscape Receptor** Landscape element, characteristic or character that would potentially receive/experience an effect.
**Visual Receptor** Individuals, special interest groups, a community or population that would potentially experience an effect on their view. | **Scenic Beauty / Scenic Quality** | Subjective value attributed to the emotional response of an individual to a landscape scene, which, although heavily influenced by intrinsic condition, is also conditioned by an individual's perception (memories, associations, cultural influences and preference). | | **Visual Amenity** | The subjective value attributed to the degree of pleasure gained from what is seen in a given view (quality of view). | | **Visual Sensitivity** | The estimated level of susceptibility or likely viewer’s response to a change in view from a given viewpoint in relation to its context, the existing visual amenity, the activity and expectations of the viewer and the number of viewers affected. | | **Tranquillity** | Subjective experience from being at a location that provides individuals with the space and conditions to relax, achieve mental balance and a sense of distance from stress. Tranquil areas are often associated with quiet, remote (or appearing remote), natural, non-developed (non-built) and non-busy areas. | | **Impacts and Effects** | ‘Impact’ refers to an action being taken and an ‘effect’ is the change resulting from that action. The process of assessing effects arising from development is commonly referred to as ‘impact assessment’. ‘Impacts’ and ‘effects’ are often used interchangeably. Directive 2011/92/EU (The assessment of the effects of certain public and private projects on the environment) requires member states to assess the likely significant effects of a project (e.g. development) on the environment before determining whether consent should be given. This requirement has been transposed via Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Regulations. This LVIA refers to significance (or level) of effects in the wider sense, to mean positive (beneficial) or negative (adverse) environmental effects that are important (material) considerations in the decision-making process, whether assessed as part of an EIA or otherwise. This is directly related to set criteria and terminology as set out within the assessment process. Significant effects may, on balance with other considerations, be acceptable or unacceptable in overall planning terms. | | **Site Visibility** | The areas within which the subject site can be seen, the amount of site visible and the numbers able to see the subject site. | | **Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV)** | Also known as a Zone of Visual Influence (ZVI), Visual Envelope Map (VEM) and Viewshed. This represents the area over which a development can theoretically be seen, based on a DTM. The ZTV usually presents a ‘bare ground’ scenario - that is, a landscape without screening structures or vegetation. This information is usually presented upon a map base. | | **Zone of Primary Visibility (ZPV)** | The Zone of Primary Visibility (ZPV) represents the geographical area from which the Proposed Development would represent a notable new element in the view and therefore where significant landscape and/or visual effects are likely to occur without further consideration (e.g. secondary mitigation). | | **Zone of Secondary Visibility (ZSV)** | A Zone of Secondary Visibility (ZSV) can be used to represent the geographical area from which the Proposed Development may be visible without being a notable new element in the view or where views are partly restricted or are from greater distances, and therefore where significant landscape and/or visual effects are unlikely to occur after Primary Mitigation measures have been taken into account. | | **Digital Terrain Model (DTM)** | Also known as a digital elevation model (DEM). This is a digital representation of the ground surface (landform or terrain) created by linking co-ordinate points of surveyed elevation values to create a 3D ‘model’ which computers can use to undertake calculations relating to slope angles, point visibility, flood risk etc. | | **Digital Surface Model (DSM)** | As per a DTM except that it relates to the levels of surfaces above the ground where present (e.g. vegetation or roof levels). | | **Field of View (FOV)** | Term used to describe the height and width of a view as represented by an image. These constitute the horizontal field of view and vertical field of view and are expressed as angles in degrees. Humans have an extreme horizontal field of view of about 200°, but only 6-10° will be in focus at any one time. Thus a viewer moves their eyes and head around to see a view over a wide area. | | Enhancement | A measure resulting in a beneficial effect which is not related to any adverse effect. | | Mitigation | A measure to avoid, reduce or remedy adverse effects (principally significant effects) caused by the proposed development. These may be defined at Primary and Secondary Mitigation measures. | | Primary (1°) Mitigation | Mitigation measures which have either been developed through the iterative design process and which have become integrated or embedded into the project design, or are commitments to utilise best practice techniques to avoid or minimise adverse effects (e.g. industry best practice guidance on construction). | | Secondary (2°) Mitigation | Mitigation measures that have been designed to address any adverse effects remaining after Primary Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design (i.e. residual adverse effects). | APPENDICES:
APPENDIX 1 METHODOLOGY AND METHOD OF ASSESSMENT APPENDIX 2 FIGURES APPENDIX 3 LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES
LIST OF APPENDIX TABLES:
TABLE AP 1 VALUE IN RELATION TO LANDSCAPE PROTECTION TABLE AP 2 VALUE IN RELATION TO LANDSCAPE CONDITION TABLE AP 3 VALUE IN RELATION TO SCENIC QUALITY TABLE AP 4 VALUE IN RELATION TO RARITY TABLE AP 5 VALUE IN RELATION TO REPRESENTATIVENESS TABLE AP 6 VALUE IN RELATION TO CONSERVATION INTEREST TABLE AP 7 VALUE IN RELATION TO TRANQUILLITY/WILDNESS TABLE AP 8 VALUE IN RELATION TO ASSOCIATIONS TABLE AP 9 RECREATION VALUE TABLE AP 10 AGRICULTURAL VALUE TABLE AP 11 OVERALL LANDSCAPE VALUE (EXAMPLE ONLY) TABLE AP 12 SUSCEPTIBILITY TO CHANGE OF LANDSCAPE RECEPTORS TABLE AP 13 LANDSCAPE SENSITIVITY TABLE AP 14 MAGNITUDE OF LANDSCAPE EFFECTS TABLE AP 15 SIGNIFICANCE OF LANDSCAPE EFFECTS TABLE AP 16 SENSITIVITY OF VISUAL RECEPTORS TABLE AP 17 MAGNITUDE OF VISUAL EFFECTS TABLE AP 18 SIGNIFICANCE OF VISUAL EFFECTS TABLE AP 19 CATEGORISATION OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS Appendix 1 METHODOLOGY AND METHOD OF ASSESSMENT
Ap 1.1 GENERAL
Ap 1.1.1 This assessment has been undertaken in accordance with:
- The Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (third edition), published April 2013 by the Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment;
- Landscape Character Assessment, Guidance for England and Scotland, published April 2002 by the Countryside Agency and Scottish Natural Heritage;
- Photography and Photomontage in Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (Advice Note 01/11), published February 2011 by the Landscape Institute; and
- An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (Christine Tudor (Natural England), 2014).
Ap 1.1.2 The assessment considers two separate (but inter-related) components:
- Effects on the Landscape; and
- Effects on Views.
Ap 1.1.3 As the two components are inter-related, the assessment of one has been undertaken alongside the other and this resultant document referred to as the Landscape and Visual Appraisal (LVA) or Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA).
Ap 1.1.4 The assessment process aims to:
1. Establish the baseline situation;
2. Identify potential sources of direct and indirect impact;
3. Identify impact receptors and estimate their sensitivity;
4. Estimate the magnitude and nature of effects;
5. Appraise alternatives and indicate additional/alternative measures of impact avoidance, mitigation or offset, where possible;
6. Re-estimate the magnitude and nature of effects; and
7. Provide an assessment of the significance of the mitigated effects and relate this back to the relevant Landscape Planning Policies.
Ap 1.1.5 In the presentation of this assessment, item 5 in the list above has been summarised only, in the interests of conciseness, i.e. the assessment of alternativeness is not presented in detail within this report.
Ap 1.1.6 The assessment includes a combination of objective and subjective judgements. Subjective judgements are avoided where possible, focussing on what would be experienced rather than making assumptions regarding people’s expected responses. Ap 1.1.7 The assessment allows for worst-case scenarios, although indications are given as to the effects under ‘normal conditions’ also, e.g. seasonal effects of vegetation.
Ap 1.1.8 No specific assessment has been made, in this report, of impacts on the historic landscape character of the area or any cultural heritage receptors such as Scheduled Monuments and Listed Buildings.
Ap 1.1.9 The detailed assessment process and terminology used is specific to this assessment. This is further described below with the intended meaning of some specific terms explained in the glossary provided.
Ap 1.2 BASELINE SITUATION – GENERAL
Ap 1.2.1 Both the landscape and visual assessment components have been undertaken against a set of Baseline Conditions (the Baseline Situation), which has been established during the first stage of the assessment process, using a combination of desk study and field survey work. This provides a transparent basis from which assessment results have been determined and against which professional judgements have been made.
Ap 1.2.2 The baseline used may be different for the landscape and visual impact assessment of specific development proposals assessed:
- In isolation (i.e. where development is assessed on its own merits); and
- In combination with other developments creating a similar effect (i.e. the cumulative landscape and visual effects of a number of similar developments).
Ap 1.2.3 The baseline used has been detailed in the assessment assumptions, in the relevant section.
Ap 1.2.4 The study of the Baseline Situation includes a review of available document sources (e.g. published Landscape Character Assessments, landscape policy guidance), Ordnance Survey map data, historical maps, aerial photographs and the undertaking of a field survey.
Ap 1.2.5 During the field survey, the principal landscape elements and features were recorded which, depending on their prominence and importance, contribute to the overall character of the area. Typical elements may include landform, land use, watercourses, vegetation, built development/infrastructure and areas of public access.
Ap 1.2.6 A check of the likely visibility of the development proposals is also made during the field survey, with a photographic record made and visual receptor information noted.
Ap 1.3 BASELINE SITUATION – LANDSCAPE ASPECTS
Ap 1.3.1 A description of the landscape characteristics is provided in relation to the Site itself and the surrounding landscape. Further analysis of the existing landscape is also made to determine aspects such as Landscape Condition, Landscape Value (non-monetary) and site visibility (see glossary) to assist in the determination of landscape sensitivity. Historic Landscape Aspects
Ap 1.3.2 Research of historic aspects of the landscape in this document is limited to sites designated for historic-related reasons and changes observed between older maps and aerial photographs where relevant.
Baseline Situation – Visual Aspects
Zones of Theoretical Visibility (ZTVs)
Ap 1.3.3 The visual baseline includes examination of the visibility of the existing Site and the proposals using ZTV computer analyses, cross-section analyses and the use of photographic records from field studies, limited to an area within which there lies the potential for significant visual effects to occur. The main study area for this assessment covers an area up to a distance of circa 3 kilometres from the Site boundary.
Ap 1.3.4 The ZTV examinations have been determined using a combination of computer-aided ground modelling software and 3D Ordnance Survey data (allowing for boundary screening, curvature of the earth and atmospheric refraction) and field observations. The ZTV does not take into account other topographical features such as built development or vegetation cover, e.g. trees and hedgerows.
Viewpoints
Ap 1.3.5 During the field study, which was undertaken in October and December 2014, a photographic record was made to represent the range of potential views towards the Site, from available viewpoints within the study area. These locations are mapped, the visual receptor types recorded and viewpoint landscape context described. No access to private properties has been obtained during the field study. Estimates of visibility have been made using computer software modelling where required.
Ap 1.3.6 The photographs have been taken using a Canon EOS 5D SLR camera using a 50mm focal length (35mm format equivalent) lens.
Ap 1.3.7 Viewpoints may be categorised as follows:
- **Representative Viewpoints** – selected to represent the experience of different types of visual receptor, where larger numbers of viewpoints cannot all be included individually and where the effects are unlikely to differ;
- **Specific Viewpoints** – selected because they are key and sometimes promoted viewpoints within the landscape; and
- **Illustrative Viewpoints** – Selected specifically to demonstrate a particular effect or specific aspect (e.g. screening).
Ap 1.3.8 From the record of identified visual receptors and general visibility viewpoints have been determined and used in the assessment process. These have been included to reflect the locations which represent a range of available views and which are typically representative of views of visual receptors most likely to incur significant visual effects within the ZTV.
Ap 1.3.9 The photographs used to illustrate the assessment have been ‘stitched’ together using digital imaging software to provide a ‘panorama image’, thus providing a visual context to the focus of the centre photograph. The photographs have been corrected for lens distortion and to correct changes of scale across the photograph and a cylindrical projection used to ensure consistency of scale across the panorama, vertically and horizontally when viewed on printed paper.
Ap 1.4 ASSESSMENT OF LANDSCAPE EFFECTS
General
Ap 1.4.1 Landscape receptors can be described in a number of ways. Landscape effects derive from changes to landscape receptors which include the physical landscape (landscape elements), which may give rise to change in how the landscape is experienced. These individual contributors to landscape character are termed ‘landscape characteristics’. Areas with similar landscape characteristics can be described as having a certain landscape character or of being a particular Landscape Character Type (LCT). Where these are specific to a geographical area they are referred to as Landscape Character Areas (LCAs). These can be described and categorised at different scales depending on criteria used.
Ap 1.4.2 The context of a location, in its wider setting, can influence the experience of the landscape and therefore its landscape character. Therefore, changes in the landscape character at one location can potentially affect the context of another landscape character type. In certain situations this can have an effect on the setting of valued or important landscape elements (e.g. registered parks and gardens).
Ap 1.4.3 The landscape impact assessment describes the likely nature and scale of changes to individual landscape elements and characteristics and the consequential effect on the landscape character in relation to the development site itself and on the wider landscape. Due to the inherently dynamic nature of the landscape, it can be accepted that change arising from a development may not necessarily be significant.
Landscape Sensitivity
Ap 1.4.4 Landscape sensitivity can vary for landscape characteristics and landscape character. The specific sensitivity of landscape character to change is referred to as landscape character sensitivity.
Ap 1.4.5 Landscape (character) sensitivity relates to the combination of:
- The (non-monetary) value of the landscape receptors, which is established at the baseline stage; and
- The susceptibility of the landscape receptors to change in relation to the Proposed Development. Landscape Value
Ap 1.4.6 Value of landscape receptors is affected by a number of factors:
- **Landscape Protection** - through designation or strength of landscape policies/strategy aims associated with a landscape or its constituent parts;
- **Landscape Condition** - Subjective value attributed to the emotional response of an individual to a landscape scene, which, although heavily influenced by intrinsic condition, is also conditioned by an individual’s perception (memories, associations, cultural influences and preference);
- **Scenic Quality** - Subjective value attributed to the emotional response of an individual to a landscape scene, which, although heavily influenced by intrinsic condition, is also conditioned by an individual’s perception (memories, associations, cultural influences and preference);
- **Rarity** - The presence of rare elements or features in the landscape or the presence of a rare Landscape Character Type;
- **Representativeness** - Whether the landscape contains a particular character and/or features or elements which are considered particularly important values;
- **Conservation Interests** - The presence of features of wildlife, earth science or archaeological or historical and cultural interest where this adds value to the landscape;
- **Wildness/tranquillity** - The presence of wild (or relatively wild) character in the landscape (e.g. rivers, sea) which makes a particular contribution to sense of place; closely associated with tranquillity (i.e. the subjective experience from being at a location that provides individuals with the space and conditions to relax, achieve mental balance and a sense of distance from stress);
- **Associations** - With particular people, (e.g. artists, writers) or events in history that contribute to perceptions of the natural beauty of the area;
- **Recreation Value** - Evidence that the landscape is valued for recreational activity where experience of the landscape is important; and
- **Agricultural Value** – Evidence that the landscape is valued for its agricultural use, referencing known site surveys, farmer knowledge and resources such as the ALC of England and Wales (MAFF, 1988).
Landscape Value: Geographical level of landscape protection
Ap 1.4.7 International designations (e.g. World Heritage Sites) would be classed as the highest level under this category, whereas the lowest would be where there are no designations, where there never have been any designations and where the landscape policy or strategy advocates the need for substantial change to improve the landscape. Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 1: Table Ap 1 Value in relation to Landscape Protection
| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Statutory, international or national landscape designation and/or policies/strategies which reflect this level of protection to change. | | High | Current, non-statutory, local landscape designation based on up-to-date assessment methods and criteria and/or policies/strategies which reflect this level of protection to change. | | Medium | Previous local landscape designations which are no longer in place but which reflect some previous value to society and/or reflected in some restrictions to change in local policies/strategies. | | Low | Landscape never been designated although some relevant general local policies in place to prevent harmful development from detracting from the landscape. | | Very Low | Landscape never been designated and active policies/strategies in place to promote improvements to a poorly-valued landscape. |
Landscape Value: Landscape Condition
Ap 1.4.8 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 2:
Table Ap 2 Value in relation to Landscape Condition
| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Consistently, characteristics are in very good condition and present in a unified manner. Landscape and cultural elements are all intact and in a strong functional and visual condition. In rural landscapes, diverse range of large and continuous habitats of very high importance. | | High | Characteristics in good condition but not in unified manner: interrupted character. Landscape and cultural elements are mostly in a strong functional and visual condition. In rural landscapes, the semi-natural habitats are fairly large, closely clustered and frequent allowing relatively easy cross-interaction. | | Medium | Generally, characteristics in good condition but sometimes masked or disrupted by incongruous elements: small level of deterioration evident. Visual and functional condition of characteristic landscape and cultural elements generally (but not necessarily entirely) reasonable; some evidence of decline. In rural landscapes, the semi-natural habitats are in relatively discrete but medium-sized units with some opportunity for cross-interaction. | | Low | Weak or degraded landscape character with a small number of characteristics present and at least as many incongruous elements present. Visual and functional condition of landscape and cultural elements generally poor. In rural landscapes, the semi-natural habitats are of limited area and patchy, providing limited opportunity for cross-interaction. | | Very Low | Heavily degraded landscape character dominated by incongruous elements in poor condition. Land has been subject to extensive alteration of distinctive landscape components removing its historical and cultural significance. In rural areas, there are only fragments of semi-natural vegetation present, too isolated to allow natural repopulation. | Landscape Value: Scenic Quality
Ap 1.4.9 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 3:
| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | No detracting characteristics. Presence of diversity and balance of form, colour, texture and contrast with interesting or captivating scenery in an aesthetically pleasing and uncommon way. | | High | Occasional detracting characteristics. Presence of some diversity and balance of form, colour, texture and contrast with interesting scenery, in an aesthetically pleasing way. | | Medium | Some detracting characteristics balancing a number of aesthetically pleasing aspects, but fairly common over the locality. | | Low | A number of detracting characteristics, with little variation or colour, texture, form or contrast generally outweighing aesthetically pleasing positive contributing characteristics to the scene. | | Very Low | Few, if any, positive characteristics present within the scene with no balance or diversity, little interest and very low aesthetic appeal. |
Landscape Value: Rarity
Ap 1.4.10 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 4:
| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Internationally or nationally distinctive, rare landscape characteristics contributing to individual character. | | High | Regionally distinctive, rare landscape characteristics contributing to individual character. | | Medium | Locally distinctive landscape characteristics contributing to local character. | | Low | Occasional individual locally distinctive landscape characteristics. | | Very Low | Very commonly found, indistinctive landscape characteristics present. | Landscape Value: Representativeness
Ap 1.4.11 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 5:
| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Landscape characteristics / character of an exceptional example of its kind. | | High | Landscape characteristics / character of an good example of its kind. | | Medium | Occasionally found examples of similar landscape characteristics / character. | | Low | Fairly frequently found examples of similar landscape characteristics / character. | | Very Low | Commonly encountered examples of similar unremarkable landscape characteristics / character. |
Landscape Value: Conservation Interests
Ap 1.4.12 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 6:
| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Numerous and/or extensive international or nationally important features or elements of wildlife, earth science, archaeological, historical or cultural interest. | | High | Frequent (some of international or national importance) features or elements of wildlife, earth science, archaeological, historical or cultural interest. | | Medium | Some regionally or locally important features or elements of wildlife, earth science, archaeological, historical or cultural interest. | | Low | Occasional locally important features or elements of wildlife, earth science, archaeological, historical or cultural interest. | | Very Low | Few, if any, elements of wildlife, earth science, archaeological, historical or cultural interest. | Landscape Value: Tranquillity/Wildness
Ap 1.4.13 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 7:
| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Strong sense of remoteness or isolation with virtually no obvious human influences present – Relative abundance of landscape characteristics contributing to an experience of tranquillity. A Tranquil Area. | | High | Secluded parts of the landscape are wild in character, where there is a sense of remoteness or isolation. Human influences are not dominant, with settlement being sparsely distributed. Occasional minor detractors to an experience of tranquillity. | | Medium | Wildness is not a strong contributing characteristic and human influences are evident, with scattered villages and other development present, detracting from an experience of tranquillity, which would be confined to localised places. | | Low | Human presence is more dominant with a corresponding lack of wildness evident, despite some rural influences. Experience of tranquillity would be rare in this landscape. | | Very Low | Human presence in terms of people, noise, movement and development dominant such that there is an absence of tranquillity or wildness. |
Landscape Value: Associations
Ap 1.4.14 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 8:
| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Landscape strongly associated with internationally prominent people, artists or writers or internationally important well-known events in history. | | High | Landscape associated with nationally prominent people, artists or writers or nationally important well-known events in history. | | Medium | Landscape widely associated with locally prominent people, artists or writers or locally important events in history. | | Low | Landscape associated, to some, with locally prominent people, artists or writers or locally recorded but minor events in history. | | Very Low | Landscape associations limited to local knowledge of locally well-known people or local minor events only. | Landscape Value: Recreation Value
Ap 1.4.15 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 9:
| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Internationally recognised or promoted area or routes for tourism and recreational use (e.g. National Park, European Long Distance Footpath) and very well used generally recreationally by more distant visitors and local population. | | High | Nationally or regionally promoted areas of open recreation or routes for such use (e.g. country park, National Trail, Scenic Routes). Other commercial uses (e.g. golf course, fishing, boating). Generally well-used for recreation from visitors and local population. | | Medium | Open general access available or general public rights of way where appreciation of the landscape is linked to its use. Fairly well-used for recreation locally. | | Low | Permissive, informal or general access routes or land where appreciation of the landscape not a strong link to its use. Used by some of local population. | | Very Low | Access and recreational value limited or absent due to incompatible land-uses. |
Landscape Value: Agricultural Value
Ap 1.4.16 Relative ratings for this aspect are indicated in Table Ap 10:
| Value Level | Relevant Criteria | |-------------|-------------------| | Very High | Agricultural capability is typically excellent or very high (generally equivalent to ALC Grade 1 or 2) – ‘Best and Most Versatile’ (BMV) agricultural land. | | High | Agricultural capability is typically good (generally equivalent to ALC Grade 3a) – ‘Best and Most Versatile’ (BMV) agricultural land. | | Medium | Agricultural land typically of moderate quality (generally equivalent to ALC Grade 3b). | | Low | Agricultural land typically of poor quality (generally equivalent to ALC Grade 4). | | Very Low | Agricultural land is typically absent or of very poor quality (generally equivalent to ALC Grade 5). |
Landscape Value: Summary
Ap 1.4.17 The assessment of Landscape Value is undertaken as appropriate for the receiving landscape receptors (e.g. the Site, or a location within an adjacent character area) and summarised in a table (example as per Table Ap 11) and subsequently given an overall assessment of landscape value provided for the landscape receptor, with further explanation provided where required. The Overall Landscape Value in the example below would be Medium.
### Table Ap 11 Overall Landscape Value (example only)
| Value Level | Protection | Landscape Condition | Scenic Quality | Rarity | Representativeness | Conservation Interests | Tranquillity/Wildness | Associations | Recreational Value | Agricultural Value | |-------------|------------|---------------------|----------------|--------|--------------------|------------------------|-----------------------|--------------|-------------------|-------------------| | Very High | | | | | | | | | | | | High | | | | | | | | | | | | Medium | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | | | | | Low | | | | | | | | | | | | Very Low | | | | | | | | | | |
### Landscape Susceptibility
Ap 1.4.18 Susceptibility refers to the ability of landscape receptors to accommodate changes brought about by the Proposed Development. Relevant criteria are provided in Table Ap 12.
### Table Ap 12 Susceptibility to Change of Landscape Receptors
| Susceptibility | Relevant Criteria | |----------------|-------------------| | Very High | Key landscape characteristics highly susceptible to change and very difficult to replace without affecting the existing character. Strong landscape structure with many distinct characteristics worthy of conservation. | | High | Landscape characteristics susceptible to change and fairly difficult to mitigate without affecting the existing character. Typically of recognisable landscape structure and some features worthy of conservation. | | Medium | Landscape characteristics with a degree of susceptibility to change; some scope to replace these elements without adversely affecting the character. Distinguishable landscape structure, few or no features worthy of conservation; may contain occasional detracting features. | | Low | Landscape characteristics of low susceptibility to change or easily replaced and potentially enhanced. Weak landscape structure or transitional in nature; some evidence of degradation and a number of detracting features. | | Very Low | Landscape characteristics are not susceptible to change. High probability to mitigate or replace the lost elements and to enhance the existing landscape. Damaged landscape structure, evidence of severe disturbance or dereliction; detracting features dominate. |
### Assessment of Landscape Sensitivity
Ap 1.4.19 Landscape Susceptibility and Landscape Value are then assessed in combination to provide an overall rating in terms of Landscape Sensitivity, with professional judgement applied and described. Generally this follows the relationship as shown in Table Ap 13 Landscape Sensitivity
| Land. Value | Very Low | Low | Medium | High | Very High | |-------------|----------|-----|--------|------|-----------| | Very Low | Very Low | Very Low | Low | Low or Medium | Medium | | Low | Very Low | Low | Low or Medium | Medium | Medium or High | | Medium | Low | Low or Medium | Medium | Medium or High | High | | High | Low or Medium | Medium | Medium or High | High | Very High | | Very High | Medium | Medium or High | High | Very High | Very High |
Magnitude of Landscape Effects
Ap 1.4.20 The Magnitude of change is concerned with the scale of change to the landscape characteristics, the geographical extent of this change and the duration/reversibility of the changes. The magnitude of landscape effects have been categorised as follows in Table Ap 14.
Table Ap 14 Magnitude of Landscape Effects
| Magnitude of Landscape Effect | Landscape Criteria | |-------------------------------|--------------------| | Very Large | Typically, large scale changes and/or numerous changes to important landscape characteristics | | Large | Typically, large scale changes to some landscape characteristics, or a high number of medium scale changes to the landscape characteristics | | Medium | Typically, some medium scale changes to some landscape characteristics | | Small | Typically, a low number of medium scale changes to landscape characteristics, or a number of small scale changes to landscape characteristics | | Very Small | Typically, occasional, small scale changes to unimportant landscape characteristics |
Ap 1.4.21 In general, the duration weighting applied to magnitude is as follows:
- Very Long term effect: 15+ years
- Long term effect: 8 to 15 years
- Medium term effect: 3 to 8 years
- Short term effects: 1.5 to 3 years
- Temporary effect: Less than 18 months
Ap 1.4.22 Where variations between relevant criteria, duration etc. occur, reasoned professional judgement is applied and described in the assessment to determine the magnitude of effect. Nature of Landscape Effect
Ap 1.4.23 Changes to landscape characteristics can be of a positive, negative or neutral nature. The determination of the nature of effect on landscape receptors is related to the Baseline Situation and what is recognised to be either a desirable or an undesirable change (e.g. from assessments of landscape quality, landscape policy guidance). A neutral effect may occur, for example, if a characteristic element is replaced with a different but equally characteristic element. Therefore, it is possible for there to be a large magnitude of change but with a neutral effect overall.
Significance of Landscape Effects
Ap 1.4.24 The significance of a landscape effect (from an impact) is a function of the sensitivity of the affected landscape receptor, the magnitude of change and the nature of effect. While the methodology is designed to be robust and transparent, professional judgement is ultimately applied to determine the significance of each effect.
Ap 1.4.25 The degree of landscape significance is defined in Table Ap 15. These are different for beneficial and adverse effects. Generally, an effect, which is greater than a ‘Moderate’ significance, is likely to be a pertinent ‘material consideration’ in the decision-making process.
### Table Ap 15 Significance of Landscape Effects
| Significance | Adverse Landscape Effects | Beneficial Landscape Effects | |--------------|---------------------------|-----------------------------| | Negligible | Overall, typically, there may be some Small scale, Short-term impacts but virtually no lasting adverse effect on existing landscape character. | Overall, typically, there may be some Small scale Short-term positive impacts but virtually no lasting beneficial effect on existing landscape character | | Minor | Typically: Some Small-Medium scale effects on existing landscape character in poor condition. Very Small or Temporary changes to Medium sensitivity landscape. Minimal effect on landscape character. | Overall, typically, landscape character and condition is slightly improved via strengthening of some valued characteristic landscape elements for a Long-term duration, in high and Very High sensitivity landscapes where limited scope to provide improvement exists, or Some shorter duration improvements to landscapes of lower sensitivity | | Moderate | Typically: Large scale and Long term changes to landscapes and/or landscape receptor of low sensitivity. Some Medium scale changes to Medium sensitivity landscape and/or landscape receptor. Very Small or Temporary changes to highly sensitive landscape and/or landscape receptor. Noticeable effect on the landscape and/or landscape receptor without exceeding the landscape capacity threshold. | Overall, typically, landscape character and condition is improved via the introduction of characteristic landscape elements and the removal of incongruous landscape elements: Permanently and greatly in highly sensitive areas; For a number of characteristics for a Medium-Long term duration in areas of Medium landscape sensitivity; For a small number of characteristics for a Short-Medium-term duration in lower sensitivity landscapes | | Major | Typically: Numerous Long-term effects on Medium sensitivity landscape and/or landscape receptor. Small permanent effects on highly sensitivity landscape and/or landscape receptor. Landscape receptor and/or character is affected to a significant degree. | Overall, typically, landscape character and condition is significantly improved via removal of some existing incongruous landscape elements and introduction/restoration of some valued characteristic landscape elements in lower and Medium sensitivity landscapes where much scope to provide improvement exists | | Substantial | Proposals are at complete variance with many key characteristics of a very highly valued landscape. | Proposals would remove substantial numbers of existing incongruous landscape elements and introduce a number of highly desirable landscape elements to substantially restore an area of landscape character of high potential landscape value for a Very Long-term period |
5.3.3 The derivation of the level of significance (of effect) uses professional judgement taking into consideration the contributing factors of sensitivity, magnitude and nature of effect and generally follows a pattern by which the relationship between sensitivity and magnitude contributes to the level of significance as shown diagrammatically in 0. It should be noted that, strictly, notable or Significant effects only need to be determined, not the assessed level of all effects, but it is acknowledged that levels of effects can be a useful aid when reading and understanding the assessment.
**Diagram 1 General Relationship Between Magnitude, Sensitivity and Significance**
| Sensitivity: | Magnitude: | |--------------|------------| | Very Low | Very small | | | Negligible | | | Minor | | | Moderate | | | Major | | | Substantial| | Very High | Very Large |
**Ap 1.5 ASSESSMENT OF VISUAL EFFECTS**
**General**
Ap 1.5.1 Visual effects relate to the experienced changes that arise in the composition of available views due to changes in a landscape scene, and to the overall effects with respect to visual amenity. Effects are defined as the relationship between the visual sensitivity, the magnitude of change and the nature of the effect.
**Visual Sensitivity**
Ap 1.5.2 The sensitivity of the visual receptor will be influenced by the value attached to views (which is established at the baseline stage) and the susceptibility to change, in relation to the development proposed.
Ap 1.5.3 Judgements on value take into account any recognised importance of the view (e.g. in relation to valued landscapes or features, or through planning designations) and any indicators of value attached to views by visitors e.g. guidebooks and tourist maps.
Ap 1.5.4 **Susceptibility to change**, in relation to the development proposed, is influenced by the following factors:
- Location and context of the viewpoint;
- Characteristics of the view, e.g. whether it is continuous or intermittent and static or transient; and
- The activity or expectations of the receptor at the viewpoint.
Ap 1.5.5 In terms of private residential receptors, whilst it is an accepted planning principle that there is ‘no right to a view’ residents are recognised as having the potential to be particularly susceptible to changes in their visual amenity. Locations (rooms) normally used in waking or daylight hours are usually considered more sensitive than other locations.
Ap 1.5.6 The indicative terminology in Table Ap 16 was used as a guide to describe sensitivity with regard to visual receptors.
### Table Ap 16 Sensitivity of Visual Receptors
| Visual Sensitivity | Value and Susceptibility to Change Criteria | Typical Receptor Types/Locations | |--------------------|---------------------------------------------|----------------------------------| | Very High | Nationally well recognised and advertised location for high visual amenity value. Prominent location or vista with high visual amenity value that is recognised in published sources. Very high susceptibility to change as a very high level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | Nationally promoted Long Distance Footpath users. Protected View recognised in planning policy designation. Visitors to nationally advertised attractions where visual amenity is very important to their enjoyment. Private views from primary living space regularly used in daylight hours where the focus is on a landscape of recognised very high value. | | High | Well-known area recognised regionally for high landscape value. Open areas of recognised public access where primary enjoyment is of the views of the landscape. High susceptibility to change as a high level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | Users of local advertised circular, recreational or well-used footpath routes and open access land where primary enjoyment is from the landscape and visual amenity. Road and rail users on routes through landscapes recognised for their high scenic value. Private views from areas of a property curtilage occasionally used in daylight hours, e.g. access drives, where the focus is on the landscape beyond private curtilage. | | Medium | Locations afford views of some value, but visual amenity not well recognised beyond locality. Moderate susceptibility to change as a moderate level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | General recognised public access routes (road and rail routes) with some landscape interest. Public houses, restaurants etc. where views would include some focus on the wider landscape. Views from recreational sport areas which may involve some incidental appreciation of views of the wider landscape, e.g. golf or fishing. Private views from residential properties from rooms not normally occupied in waking or daylight hours, e.g. bedrooms. | | Low | Viewpoint context and location is of lesser value than similar views from nearby visual receptors that may be more accessible. Low susceptibility to change as low level of attention focussed on the landscape and particular views. | Views from recreational sport areas which does not involve or depend upon appreciation of views of the landscape, e.g. football, rugby, speedway. Minor road routes where passengers would have limited focus on a landscape of no recognised value. People at their places of work where the main focus is not on the surrounding landscape context. | | Very Low | Viewpoint context is such that views have a very low value. Expectations of visual amenity are very low. Activity at viewpoint is incidental to the view. | People at their place of work where there the type of activity has no relationship to the surrounding landscape context. | Magnitude of Visual Effects
Ap 1.5.7 The magnitude or scale of visual change is described by reference to:
- Scale of Change;
- Geographical Extent; and
- The Duration and Reversibility of the effect.
Ap 1.5.8 The Scale of Change takes into account the loss or addition of features in the view and changes in the composition of the view including the proportion of the view occupied by the Proposed Development. The extent of contrast or integration of any new features or changes in the landscape scene with the existing or remaining landscape elements and characteristics in terms of form, scale and mass, line, height, colour and texture is also considered.
Ap 1.5.9 The Geographical Extent will vary with different viewpoints and is likely to reflect:
- The angle of view in relation to the main activity of the receptor;
- The proximity of the viewpoint to the Proposed Development; and
- The extent of the area over which the changes would be visible.
Ap 1.5.10 Viewpoint proximity to the Site was classed as follows:
- Close-range: Within 0.5km
- Medium-range: Between 0.5km and 1.5km
- Long-range: Over 1.5km
Ap 1.5.11 In general, the Duration and reversibility considerations applied to magnitude are as follows:
- Very Long term effect: 15+ years
- Long term effect: 8 to 15 years
- Medium term effect: 3 to 8 years
- Short term effects: 1.5 to 3 years
- Temporary effect: Less than 18 months
Ap 1.5.12 The terminology in Table Ap 17 was adopted for the definition of magnitude of visual effects:
### Table Ap 17 Magnitude of Visual Effects
| Magnitude of Visual Effect | Visual Criteria | |---------------------------|-----------------| | Very Large | Where the proposals become the only dominant feature in the view and to which all other elements become subordinate. Typically involves direct views at close range over a wide horizontal and vertical extent. | | Large | Where the proposals would form a significant and immediately apparent element of the scene and would affect the overall impression of the view. Typically involves direct or oblique views at close range with notable changes over the horizontal and vertical extent. | | Medium | Where proposals would form a visible and recognisable new development but where it is not intrusive within the overall view. Typically involves direct or oblique views at medium range with a moderate horizontal and/or vertical extent of the view affected. | | Small | Where proposals constitute only a minor component of the wider view, which the casual observer could miss or where awareness does not affect the overall quality of the scene. Typically involves an oblique view at medium or long range or a direct view at long range with a small horizontal/vertical extent of the view affected. | | Very Small | Where only a very small part of the development is discernible or that it is at such a distance that the effects are scarcely appreciated. |
Ap 1.5.13 Where variations between relevant criteria occur, reasoned professional judgement is applied and described in the assessment to determine the magnitude of effect.
**Nature of Visual Effect**
Ap 1.5.14 Changes to view can be of a **positive**, **negative** or **neutral** nature. The determination of the nature of effect on view is related to the Baseline Situation and what is considered to be either a desirable or an undesirable change. The assessment of the nature of visual effect focuses on what is *experienced*, although some professional judgement has (by necessity) been applied to consider the subjective matter of whether the change could generally be received by the visual receptors as positive, negative or neutral. The assumptions and judgements made are reasoned in the text.
**Significance of Visual Effects**
Ap 1.5.15 The significance of visual effects (from an impact) is a function of the sensitivity of the affected visual receptor, the magnitude of change and the nature of effect. While the methodology is designed to be robust and transparent, professional judgement is ultimately applied to determine the significance of each effect.
Ap 1.5.16 The results of the assessment have been presented by providing a brief description of the existing view from each principal representative viewpoint/receptor, followed by a description of changes to the view and the landscape scene and an analysis of the magnitude and nature of the effects.
Ap 1.5.17 The significance of visual effects is defined in Table Ap 18. These are different for beneficial and adverse effects. Generally, an effect which is of ‘Major’ significance, or above, is likely to be a pertinent ‘material consideration’ in the decision-making process.
### Table Ap 18 Significance of Visual Effects
| Significance | Adverse Visual Effects | Beneficial Visual Effects | |--------------|------------------------|---------------------------| | Negligible | Adverse effect has minimal significance due to low visual amenity even from otherwise sensitive viewpoints. Produces only very slight deterioration to views. | Beneficial effect has minimal significance due to limited scope to improve existing view even from sensitive viewpoints. Provides only very slight improvement to views. | | Minor | Typically: Large-very large scale deterioration to low sensitivity views of low quality. Small scale deterioration to lower and Medium sensitivity views of high quality. Very Small-Medium scale deterioration to higher sensitivity receptors with low existing visual amenity. | Typically: Medium scale improvements to existing views with high visual amenity and Medium sensitivity. Small scale improvements to views of low visual amenity from low sensitivity viewpoints. Very Small scale improvements to low quality high sensitivity views. | | Moderate | Typically: Noticeable Long-term or Large scale deterioration in low sensitivity but high quality views. Medium scale deterioration to Medium sensitivity high quality views and Very Large changes to low quality views. Small scale and Temporary deterioration in Highly sensitive and high amenity value views and larger scale deterioration in low quality views. | Typically: Noticeable large-scale improvement in unimportant views with low existing visual amenity and visual sensitivity. Small to Medium scale improvements to views from Medium and High sensitivity viewpoints with low existing visual amenity. Very Small scale improvements in existing low visual amenity from Very High sensitivity viewpoints. | | Major | Typically: Medium scale deterioration in High sensitivity, high quality views, or larger scale deterioration in High sensitivity but lower quality views. Small scale deterioration to higher sensitivity views of high quality. Considerable Long-term deterioration in Medium sensitivity views of high amenity value. | Typically: Large to Very Large scale improvements at Medium to High sensitivity locations. Medium to Large scale improvements to High sensitivity viewpoints with low existing visual amenity. | | Substantial | Clear and obvious Very Large-scale adverse changes resulting in considerable and Long-term deterioration in Highly sensitive and important views. | Clear and obvious very large scale changes resulting in considerable and Long-term improvement in existing poor view for High sensitivity receptors. |
5.3.4 The derivation of the level of significance (of effect) uses professional judgement taking into consideration the contributing factors of sensitivity, magnitude and nature of effect and generally follows a pattern by which the relationship between sensitivity and magnitude contributes to the level of significance as shown diagrammatically in Diagram 2. It should be noted that, strictly, notable or Significant effects only need to be determined, not the assessed level of all effects, but it is acknowledged that levels of effects can be a useful aid when reading and understanding the assessment. Diagram 2 General Relationship Between Magnitude, Sensitivity and Significance
Ap 1.6 ASSESSMENT OF CUMULATIVE EFFECTS
General
Ap 1.6.1 The cumulative landscape and visual effects of two or more developments may be more or less than the sum of the individual effects and therefore may need to be assessed in addition to the assessment of effects of the Proposed Development undertaken in isolation of other similar developments.
Ap 1.6.2 The assessment of cumulative effects may require different baseline assumptions to be made, to allow the assessment to differentiate between isolated and cumulative effects.
Ap 1.6.3 Cumulative effects may take into account:
- Other existing (recently built or partially built) developments;
- Other approved developments that have not yet been built;
- Other proposals awaiting determination of approval or are reasonably foreseeable.
Ap 1.6.4 The assessment of cumulative effects process remains the same as for the individual assessment and the same terminology (supplemented below) can be applied.
Cumulative Visual Effects
Ap 1.6.5 Cumulative visual effects can be gained in combination (i.e. where two or more similar developments are visible from one viewpoint) and sequentially (i.e. when two or more similar developments are visible from different viewpoints along a route (e.g. a railway line, recognised tourist route or recreational footpath). Cumulative visual effects can be further categorised as described in Table Ap 1. Table Ap 19 Categorisation of Cumulative Effects
| Cumulative Visual Effect | Sub-type of Effect | Description | |--------------------------|-------------------|-------------| | Combined Effect | Simultaneous | Two or more developments visible from one viewpoint in field of view gained from looking in one direction | | | Successive | Two or more developments visible from one viewpoint only by changing orientation of viewing direction (i.e. by turning round) | | Sequential Effect | Frequently sequential | Where similar visual effects are experienced along a route, from different viewpoints separated by short distances or short time gaps (e.g. along a motorway) | | | Occasionally sequential | Where similar visual effects are experienced along a route, from different viewpoints separated by large distances or long time gaps (e.g. along a long distance footpath) |
Ap 1.6.6 A cumulative perceived effect may occur due to a receptors’ knowledge of developments’ proximity to one another, even though they may not be visible.
Cumulative Landscape Effects
Ap 1.6.7 Cumulative landscape effects can occur in relation to landscape elements individually and also in combination (landscape character). The cumulative effects on landscape character take into account the wider area and the potential effects of other listed developments. Appendix 2 FIGURES Appendix 3 LANDSCAPE GUIDELINES
## Landscape guidelines
### White Peak
#### Protect
| Protect the strongly nucleated settlement pattern of villages and scattered farms | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | |---|---|---|---|---| | Protect and maintain the historic field pattern | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Protect and maintain historic drystone walls | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Protect and maintain historic field barns | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales |
#### Manage
| Manage and enhance surviving areas of natural landscapes | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | |---|---|---|---|---| | Enhance the diversity of agricultural grassland | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Manage traditional plantation woodlands | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Manage and enhance woodlands | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Manage and enhance linear tree cover and amenity trees | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Manage the network of tracks and footpaths to maximise opportunities to enjoy the landscape | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Manage the network of minor roads to maintain character and local access | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Manage historic mineral landscapes | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales |
#### Plan
| Create areas of limestone grassland and heath | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | |---|---|---|---|---| | Create new native broadleaved woodland | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Develop appropriate landscapes from mineral workings | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales | | Develop small-scale renewable energy for local needs | Limestone Village | Limestone Plateau | Limestone Hills & Slopes | Limestone Dales |
- This is a priority throughout the landscape character type
- This is a priority in some parts of the landscape character type, often associated with particular conditions/features
- This is not a priority but may be considered in some locations
- This will generally be inappropriate in this landscape character type Landscape guidelines explanation
Protect
Protect the strongly nucleated settlement pattern of villages and scattered farms
The character of the White Peak is typified by the historic pattern and distinctive vernacular style of its small limestone villages. In order to maintain the integrity of the historic fabric, character and setting of settlements and buildings, new development and conversions should respond positively to the historical settlement pattern, density, local materials and building traditions. Traditional buildings are an important feature and their renovation and maintenance should be encouraged. Locating new agricultural buildings can also impact on landscape character and opportunities should be taken to guide site selection.
Protect and maintain historic drystone walls
Drystone walls, and associated features such as gateposts, are an important historic feature in the limestone landscapes of the White Peak. In places the standard of walls is declining and there is a need to enhance their maintenance.
Protect and maintain historic field barns
Traditional farm buildings are of significant value to the character of the landscape and it is important to maintain the fabric and appearance of such buildings. Isolated field barns are a special cultural feature in the White Peak, especially in the Plateau Pastures. Where they can no longer be maintained in agricultural use, careful consideration needs to be given to appropriate alternatives. Changes to the appearance of either the building or its surroundings should be avoided, especially where these are not in keeping with the rural character of the landscape. Conversion to residential use would be particularly inappropriate in a region where settlement is strongly nucleated in small villages.
Protect and maintain the historic field pattern
Field pattern is a prominent feature in the Limestone Village Farmlands and Plateau Pastures, reflecting the historic character of these landscapes. It is important that these field patterns are protected, particularly in the Limestone Village Farmlands where the enclosure reflects the earlier, Medieval, open field system. Where the field pattern has become fragmented through the removal of field boundaries it is important to avoid further loss and to look for opportunities to restore primary boundaries along highways, footpaths and farm and parish boundaries.
Lathkill Dale © Peak District National Park Authority Manage
Manage and enhance surviving areas of natural landscapes
Extensive areas of semi-natural grassland and more localised patches of heath are landscape features of the Limestone Dales and Limestone Hills & Slopes. These areas support diverse plant and animal communities and they should be conserved as a priority. Lack of grazing has resulted in some areas reverting to scrub and woodland. There is a need to identify areas that are a priority for scrub clearance and others where retention of scrub or woodland regeneration will be more appropriate and will provide habitat diversity. Appropriate grazing and scrub control should be carried out as a priority to maintain a mosaic of diverse landscapes whilst respecting cultural heritage.
Enhance the diversity of agricultural grassland
Many of the enclosed grasslands in the Limestone Village Farmlands and Plateau Pastures have been improved and reseeded with a consequent loss of species and visual diversity. There is a need to manage these pastures in a more sustainable way that restores or conserves species diversity whilst supporting productive agriculture. Opportunities to extend and enhance the management of unimproved pastures should also be sought, particularly in the Limestone Village Farmlands.
Manage traditional plantation woodlands
In the Limestone Village Farmlands and Plateau Pastures there are linear or rectangular shelterbelts and groups of trees around farmsteads and settlements, and on the site of old lead mine workings. These are often not managed and suffering from dereliction. Opportunities should be sought to ensure their continuity, enhance diversity and improve woodland productivity, whilst conserving cultural heritage features. There may be opportunities to link woodland management to local wood fuel schemes and reduce reliance on traditional carbon-based energies. To mitigate new development, new plantation woodlands may be appropriate in localised areas where they maintain or enhance existing landscape character. Increased woodland cover creates areas of shelter and shade, and may be useful for mitigating the impacts of climate change.
Manage and enhance woodlands
Larger woodlands are only a feature in the Limestone Dales, where there is a mixture of both ancient and secondary woods. Many of these woods are neglected or would benefit from enhanced management. Some have been recently managed under the Ravine WoodLIFE Project, and further opportunities should be sought to increase diversity and improve woodland productivity whilst conserving cultural heritage features. Plantation woodlands in the Limestone Dales should be managed to create a more semi-natural structure and composition, and extended through natural regeneration. There may be opportunities to link woodland management to local wood fuel schemes and reduce reliance on traditional carbon-based energies. A balance will need to be reached between woodland expansion and the retention of important open landscapes and vistas.
Manage and enhance linear tree cover and amenity trees
Individual and groups of linear boundary trees are important landscape features in localised areas of the Limestone Plateau Pastures, e.g. along existing and historic transport routes. There is a need to manage these trees to ensure a balanced age structure whilst seeking opportunities, where appropriate, to extend and replace boundary trees. Individual or groups of trees within settlements also contribute significantly to village landscapes. These should be managed to ensure their continuity whilst addressing health and safety issues and residents’ amenity.
Manage the network of tracks and footpaths to maximise opportunities to enjoy the landscape
The network of tracks and footpaths should be managed to maximise opportunities for healthy recreation and to enjoy the landscape. This can be achieved easily by landscape management measures such as surfacing, and by controlling inappropriate use to retain the character, cultural heritage and biodiversity interests.
Manage the network of minor roads to maintain character and local access
The network of minor roads should be managed to maintain their local, small-scale and rural character to ensure good local access whilst discouraging inappropriate driving. Verges and cultural features should be maintained and enhanced, and the impact of signage minimised. Manage historic mineral landscapes
An important characteristic feature which runs throughout all landscape character types are the historic mineral workings, particularly the remains of lead working. Landscapes associated with historic mineral extraction should be retained and managed, including, where appropriate, providing interpretation of their history.
Plan
Create areas of limestone grassland and heath
Since the 1940s the trend in agriculture has been towards more intensive farming methods. This trend has been especially marked on the poorer land of the Limestone Hills & Slopes. To a lesser extent this has also occurred in the Limestone Dales, where patches of formerly rough land have been converted to improved pasture. This has resulted in a gradual decline in the diversity of the region, including the loss of many cultural heritage features. There are opportunities to create extensive areas of unenclosed limestone grassland and heath, and to extend and link existing patches, particularly within the Limestone Hills & Slopes, by natural regeneration and creation. In places, there may be localised opportunities to create grassland or heathland habitats above dale brows in the Limestone Village Farmlands and Plateau Pastures areas. Expansion should not occur where this would adversely impact on cultural heritage features and historic landscapes.
Create new native broadleaved woodland
There are localised opportunities to extend woodland cover, without affecting cultural heritage and biodiversity features and historic landscapes, within the Limestone Hills & Slopes. There are opportunities to extend woodland by natural regeneration and by planting, although a balance will need to be reached between woodland expansion and the retention of limestone grassland/heath and scrub. In places there may be localised opportunities to extend Limestone Dales woodland over the dale brow into the Limestone Village Farmlands and Plateau Pastures. This should be done where it would not adversely impact on important cultural heritage features and historic landscapes. Increased woodland cover creates areas of shelter and shade and may be useful for mitigating the impacts of climate change.
Develop appropriate landscapes from mineral workings
Parts of the White Peak have been heavily influenced by vein mineral extraction and limestone quarrying, with large active quarries in the Limestone Hills & Slopes and Limestone Plateau Pastures. Modern mineral workings should be restored to maximise visual amenity, biodiversity, recreational, educational and heritage value. The aim should be to use the land to create semi-natural landscapes, which blend into the surrounding landscape.
Develop small-scale renewable energy for local needs
There are localised opportunities for the development of water power, solar power, local wood fuel supplies, anaerobic digestion and other renewable energy sources. Opportunities should be sought within new development and management of woodland to increase local renewable energy supply, where it would have a neutral impact on the character of the area and its component parts. Where appropriate seek positive measures to reinforce the local landscape character as part of the new development. Outline of residual landform beyond retained trees Removal of woodland and lowering of tip (restored land beyond)
Approx. limit of retained trees
VIEWPOINT 7: 630m south-southeast of site boundary on public footpath no. FP2 (Limestone Way Long Distance Bridleway). Photograph viewing distance 320mm. Horizontal FOV 71°
VIEWPOINT 7: (showing wider context). Photograph viewing distance 160mm FOV 143°
Notes:
- Camera: Canon EOS 5D
- Focal Length: 24mm
- Date: 17/02/2014
- FOV given to nearest whole degree.
Viewing distance indicates distance for image to both eyes to represent approximate scale of features within the photograph as would be seen by the naked eye. This is a visual aid only.
Note: photographs will never exactly replicate an individual's view with the naked eye. This is a visual aid only.
Crestwood Environmental Ltd 1000 High Street Preston Business Park Preston PR2 2SH Tel: 01772 555555 info@crestwoodenvironmental.co.uk http://www.crestwoodenvironmental.co.uk
Lafarge Tarmac
Client: Crestwood Environmental Ltd
Drawing Title: BALLIDON QUARRY
VIEWPOINT 7
Date: 3/6/2015 Scale: 1:25,000 Paper Size: A3 (420x297mm)
Drawn By: [Signature] Checked By: [Signature] Status: Final
File No.: CE-BD0750-DV05 - Final (Fig.10) Background woodland on tip to be removed, lowering skyline.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0634-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 93,
"total-input-tokens": 224299,
"total-output-tokens": 44510,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
242,
1
],
[
242,
962,
2
],
[
962,
5309,
3
],
[
5309,
5899,
4
],
[
5899,
8859,
5
],
[
8859,
11572,
6
],
[
11572,
14881,
7
],
[
14881,
17603,
8
],
[
17603,
19020,
9
],
[
19020,
21332,
10
],
[
21332,
23719,
11
],
[
23719,
26284,
12
],
[
26284,
29097,
13
],
[
29097,
31711,
14
],
[
31711,
34700,
15
],
[
34700,
37031,
16
],
[
37031,
40789,
17
],
[
40789,
44487,
18
],
[
44487,
46570,
19
],
[
46570,
49828,
20
],
[
49828,
52944,
21
],
[
52944,
56110,
22
],
[
56110,
58859,
23
],
[
58859,
60243,
24
],
[
60243,
63262,
25
],
[
63262,
66333,
26
],
[
66333,
69376,
27
],
[
69376,
73269,
28
],
[
73269,
76125,
29
],
[
76125,
78313,
30
],
[
78313,
81801,
31
],
[
81801,
84792,
32
],
[
84792,
87414,
33
],
[
87414,
90833,
34
],
[
90833,
93892,
35
],
[
93892,
97377,
36
],
[
97377,
100511,
37
],
[
100511,
103816,
38
],
[
103816,
107213,
39
],
[
107213,
109874,
40
],
[
109874,
112809,
41
],
[
112809,
116412,
42
],
[
116412,
119447,
43
],
[
119447,
120142,
44
],
[
120142,
122320,
45
],
[
122320,
125380,
46
],
[
125380,
128929,
47
],
[
128929,
133418,
48
],
[
133418,
134299,
49
],
[
134299,
135314,
50
],
[
135314,
137443,
51
],
[
137443,
140160,
52
],
[
140160,
142760,
53
],
[
142760,
145404,
54
],
[
145404,
148061,
55
],
[
148061,
151127,
56
],
[
151127,
152903,
57
],
[
152903,
154530,
58
],
[
154530,
156693,
59
],
[
156693,
159165,
60
],
[
159165,
162581,
61
],
[
162581,
164736,
62
],
[
164736,
166011,
63
],
[
166011,
169401,
64
],
[
169401,
171583,
65
],
[
171583,
174815,
66
],
[
174815,
176332,
67
],
[
176332,
179587,
68
],
[
179587,
182856,
69
],
[
182856,
184347,
70
],
[
184347,
185770,
71
],
[
185770,
185790,
72
],
[
185790,
185823,
73
],
[
185823,
188551,
74
],
[
188551,
191014,
75
],
[
191014,
195412,
76
],
[
195412,
198675,
77
],
[
198675,
198675,
78
],
[
198675,
198675,
79
],
[
198675,
198675,
80
],
[
198675,
198675,
81
],
[
198675,
198675,
82
],
[
198675,
198675,
83
],
[
198675,
198675,
84
],
[
198675,
198675,
85
],
[
198675,
198726,
86
],
[
198726,
199926,
87
],
[
199926,
199926,
88
],
[
199926,
199926,
89
],
[
199926,
199986,
90
],
[
199986,
199986,
91
],
[
199986,
199986,
92
],
[
199986,
199986,
93
]
]
} |
ce0a679564509ac3eea4135a605a4ea22893792f | Youth Hostel Association (England and Wales) Limited
Structural Inspection Report YHA HOSTEL ILAM HALL ASHBOURNE
Date: 9 July 2014 Prepared by: P A Hucks Reviewed by: P A Hucks Project No. 1617 BRIEF
At the request of Youth Hostel Association (England and Wales) Limited, Summit Consulting Engineers Limited visited the Hostel at Ilam Hall, Ashbourne in the Peak District in order to undertake a structural visual inspection of the external rear corner piers of the property and prepare a report with conclusions and recommendations where possible.
INTRODUCTION
The property was a substantial detached property built we understand around 1820; records indicate that this building replaces an earlier building constructed in the 16th century; the present building is significantly reduced in footprint as the original 1820’s building suffered severe fire damage in the 1920’s and subsequently underwent refurbishment works with the former main area of the building being demolished and the remainder subject to the refurbishment utilising, it is understood, salvaged stone work from the former larger building.
The property is understood to be a Grade II\* Listed Building and is currently owned by The National Trust.
Since the mid-1930’s, the property has been used as a hostel.
DOCUMENTS PROVIDED
We have been provided no drawings of the property; we have however been provided with copies of some historical photographs of the property.
Attached to this Report in Appendix A are copies of these relevant documents. INSPECTION
On 9 June 2014 we attended the property in order to undertake our visual structural inspection.
During the course of our inspection we did not cut in to the fabric of the structure nor did we enter any inaccessible roof or floor areas and our Report should be based in this light.
Where left and right hand sides are indicated in this Report, they are given at all times as viewing the property from the front with the main entrance within the Porte Cochere being located at the front left hand corner on the north elevation.
Ground level around the property fell generally from the right to the left; the rear external levels beyond the building were elevated forming a terrace. The property was surrounded with trees but these were noted to be sufficiently distant so as not to be influential on the stability of the building foundations.
During the course of our inspection we noted the following items which are relevant to our Report and photographs are included in Appendix B of this Report:
External
1. On the rear (south) elevation of the left hand wing we noted the corners were formed with unorthodox sandstone piers which projected beyond the faces of the main building line and ashlar panels. The piers terminated below the upper parapet wall string course with no apparent finishing block to disperse any surface water that may collect on this “ledge”. It is unclear why such an arrangement would have been formed as one would generally expect to see integral quoin stones at the corner that add lateral resistance and run in course with the adjoining ashlar, although often project slightly from the building line for aesthetical reasons.
Figure 1: Area of displacement to piers 2. The stonework to these corner piers was noted to course with the main wall panels on the left hand and rear elevations; however both the left hand and right hand piers coursing was mainly mis-aligned with the left hand and right hand ashlar panels.
03. The left hand pier showed a reasonably regular vertical joint with the left hand and rear elevations; these joints however were open in several sections; the pier itself appeared to be reasonably plumb for its full height.
04. The right hand pier showed a widening joint between the pier and the rear elevation with the joint becoming wider towards the top; this movement was pronounced from the string course around first floor level up to the parapet wall; it was noted that the head of the pier appeared to be wedged below the stone blocking course or frieze section forming part of the parapet wall. The joint between the pier and the right hand elevation was noted to be reasonably regular; this joint however was open in several sections up its height.
05. The right hand pier was noted to lean outwards to the right and slightly to the rear with the lean noted from about first floor level.
06. The bay window on the rear elevation showed little signs of recent structural movement with the junctions between the bay structure and the rear elevation, which were noted to be generally intact. Some surface decay and deterioration of the stonework was evident, particularly to the bases of the mullion sections, however there was no signs to suggest recent structural movement. Whilst general weathering has understandably occurred, this is relatively minor considering the age of the building.
07. At high level there was a parapet wall to the rear block formed in three courses of Ashlar blocks with coping stone detail above. To the right hand elevation of this parapet wall, a general bulge was noted along its length with secondary distortion to the rear elevation. Cracking was also evident to the main bulged section and to the secondary distorted section. The mortar joints to this area including vertical perpends were noted to be open.
08. We noted no evidence of recent structural damage to the main elevations forming the left hand wing; the main wall panels themselves appeared to be reasonably plumb.
09. We noted that tie bars were installed to the rear left hand block of the left hand wing complete with pattress plates and are understood to be relatively historic from the record images kindly provided on site for review.
10. The stone work above the entrance Porte Cochere incorporated an ornate band course containing a row of blind quatrefoils, a feature carved stone crest panel to the centre and a parapet detail with battlements complete with embrasures and merlons at the head. Cracking was noted to the arched heads forming the covered entrance on the right hand and left hand elevations with secondary cracking noted to the soffit of the area.
11. Slight cracking was noted to the front elevation to the right of the Porte Cochere above and below window openings; however such cracking did not appear to be recent.
12. A full inspection of the roofs was not possible at the time of our inspection; however there were no reported issues of water ingress.
**Internal**
13. Throughout the interior of the property in the areas of the external areas of concern, we noted no evidence of recent structural damage. DISCUSSION
The property is understood to be nearly 190 years old and retains much of the original features including tall decorative ceilings and areas of ornate stonework to the external elevations.
Our inspection has determined that the rear corner piers or pilasters to the left hand wing are effectively free standing with little, if any tie to the main wall panels. Indications from site measurements taken, suggest that the piers comprise stone blocks which are approximately 150mm on bed and are therefore slender when considering the height of the piers; there was an apparent lack of connection with the main building; notwithstanding the above the piers fortunately seemed to be relatively vertical at the corners in general except for the lean to the rear right hand pier at high level.
We can see no benefit in undertaking a monitoring exercise to determine if movement is progressive or otherwise, however instead we would recommend that remedial works are required to address the movement.
The rear left hand pier shows minimal structural movement; such movement shows mainly as perishing of the vertical joints of the pier to the adjacent wall panels.
In contrast, the rear right hand pier shows leaning along with perishing of the vertical joints with the lean appearing to be restricted, for now, by the stone blocking course of the parapet wall above. However, the stone block against which this corner pier has become wedged is small in comparison with the other blocks of the parapet wall.
The underlying cause of the movement is most probably due to an inherent construction flaw and the free standing nature of the piers appearing to have minimal, if any tie to the adjacent wall panels along with the relative slenderness of the piers. The movement does not appear to be related to foundation settlement or rotation. It is possible that the movement is exacerbated by the poor closure to the heads of the piers and the resultant wash-out/settlement of the rubble fill to the piers.
The parapet wall above the rear left hand area of the left hand wing shows bulging along the length of the right hand wall with secondary distortion to the rear wall and associated cracking. We noted that the parapet wall was constructed with comparatively thin Ashlar blocks with the pointing having noticeably deteriorated; this lack of adhesion between the stones in such a vulnerable location will offer little resistance to movement and will also allow water to penetrate.
It is most probable that the bulging is as a consequence of the block thickness and the deterioration of the mortar along with thermal movement of the right hand (west) wall panel together.
Remedial works shall be required to the parapet wall.
The bay window on the rear elevation showed little signs of recent structural movement. Movement or displacement of stone mullions under compression is usually caused due to either face bedding and orientation of the stone, propagation of natural fissures, overloading or expansion of ferrous metal dowels used to connect the vertical members to the cill stoolings at the base and at other junctions such as horizontal transoms. Although no intervention for realignment is justified at this stage, it would be prudent to either monitor the condition of such important building elements or to undertake remedial works to reinstate the mullion sections particularly at the bases of the deteriorated mullions.
Elsewhere minor cracking was noted to the external elevations to the Porte Cochere and to the wall to the right of the main entrance. REMEDIAL ACTIONS
The remedial works to the rear corner piers can be undertaken successfully with the works to the two individual free standing piers requiring different solutions.
The rear left hand pier requires to be mechanically tied to the adjacent wall panels by diamond drilling through the face of the stone blocks, ensuring minimum percussion and installing long stainless steel tie bars anchoring the same in to the wall panels. The faces of the affected blocks can then be made good using the annulus of the stone (the historic material) removed to conceal the ends of the tie bars in such a way as to offer protection to the tie bar ends and to maintain the appearance of the pier. A degree of honesty yet legibility in the repair will be achieved therefore honouring good conservation principles and practice.
The rear right hand pier should be partially taken down and rebuilt, however, it must be noted that these works will affect the stability of parapet wall above, as the support to that parapet wall will be removed. As such, the remedial works to this pier and the parapet wall should be undertaken concurrently.
In addition the lower section of the rear right hand corner pier should be mechanically tied to the adjacent wall panels as described above for the rear left hand corner pier.
The parapet wall should be taken down from approximately mid-way along the rear elevation and the majority of the right hand elevation. The corner pier should be taken down to just above the string course around first floor level and thereafter the pier should systematically rebuilt incorporating mechanical ties to the wall panels. Once the pier has been rebuilt, the parapet wall should be rebuilt back to line and level including reinstatement of all affected flashings etc.
The annotated repair proposals prepared by Helifix and provided within the Appendix C of this Report, detail a stainless steel sock anchor arrangement which are considered to be an appropriate remedial solution. These proposals should be considered in conjunction with the recommendations made within this Report.
As a sensible and subtle intervention, it is recommended that both corner piers be finished with suitable capping stones to close the heads of the piers to afford suitable protection against water ingress. Limited remedial works are also recommended to the bay window on the rear elevation to restore the bases of the mullions; such works can be suitably colour matched using lime based restoration mortar to blend in with the remainder of the stonework forming this bay window.
Elsewhere to the elevation the various areas of cracking should be addressed; this remedial work should comprise the raking out of the existing mortar as an area opposed to simple line works; thereafter the areas can be repointed in a lime based mortar.
It would be prudent to approach the Local Authority and the National Trust, whom we understand presently own the property to seek approval to undertake the works and to agree the full specification of the remedial works. Whilst repairs to Listed Buildings are permitted without full Listed Building Consent, provided they meet and honour conservation principles and use matching traditional materials and techniques, any amendments or adjustments to such an historic building asset will inevitably require Consent. Early discussions would therefore be advocated and this Report will hopefully act as a ‘springboard’ to facilitate this.
All recommendations made within this Report are based on sound technical judgement on the structural integrity of the elements discussed and remedial works described are deemed essential to safeguard the ongoing survival of part of the impressive heritage asset that is, Ilam Hall. We feel the proposals demonstrate compliance with the tenets of conservation practice and principles, which demand a minimum intervention approach and maximum retention of historic fabric throughout.
The conservation discussion document which is included within the Appendix D of this Report for further reference helps guide our decision making when dealing with such sites. CONCLUSIONS
Having carefully reviewed the matter we have drawn the following conclusions:
1. The damage noted to the corner piers is such that monitoring will delay the inevitable remediation actions required.
2. The rear corner piers require remedial works to be undertaken.
3. The rear left hand pier should be mechanically tied to the adjacent wall panels.
4. The rear right hand corner pier should be partially taken down and rebuilt and tied to the adjacent wall panels.
5. The parapet wall above the rear block should be partially taken down and rebuilt; these works are to be carried out in conjunction with the works to the rear right hand corner pier.
6. The rear bay window would benefit from remedial actions to restore the eroded base sections of the mullions.
7. The areas of cracking to the elevations are to be raked out and repointed as an area remedial action and not just simple line works.
8. Formal Approvals shall be required to undertake the remedial works from both the Local Authority as well as the building owners, The National Trust.
9. Specialist contractors should be engaged to undertake the works given the detail and quality of the damaged areas and the Listed status of the property. BUDGET COSTS
We have carefully considered the costs for the remedial works and provide the following budget costs based on works of a similar nature with which we have recently been involved.
These budget costs include all required access equipment, scaffold etc but exclude costs associated with the contractor accommodation for the duration of the works are excluded:
Works to rear right hand pier:
- Structural intervention (mechanical ties) £6,000.00
- Dismantlement and rebuilding etc £7,500.00
Works to rear left hand pier:
- Structural intervention (mechanical ties) £7,500.00
Works to parapet wall:
- Dismantling and rebuilding including ties etc £7,000.00
Repointing works:
- Assuming an area of 20 m²: £2,000.00
TOTAL BUDGET COSTS £30,000.00 plus VAT
In addition to the contractor costs Local Authority fees shall be required along with decoration costs and professional fees.
Prepared by: P A Hucks C.Eng M.I.Struct.E B.Sc.(Hons) APPENDIX A
Historic photographs – provided by Youth Hostel Association A1. Image of the original 1820’s Ilam Hall – note Porte Cochere to the far right corner.
A2. Copy of historic plan showing the original ground floor plan – note Porte Cochere and areas shown now demolished. APPENDIX B
Photographs – taken during site inspection on 9 June 2014 B1. View of Ilam Hall and the left hand wing – note Porte Cochere to the right of the image and the rear block and corner projecting pier to the left of the image.
B2. View of front and right hand elevation of the Porte Cochere and the remainder of the property running off to the right. B3. View of rear elevation of the rear block.
B4. View of the upper part of the rear elevation of the rear block including the parapet. B5. View of left hand elevation of the rear block.
B6. Detail view of rear left hand corner pier to the left hand elevation of the rear block – note the ties and pattress plates. B7. View of rear right hand corner pier to the rear block.
B8. Detail view of right hand face of the rear right hand corner pier to the rear block. B9. Detail view of rear face of the rear right hand corner pier to the rear block – note the high level rotation, the tie bar and pattress plate and the apparent wedging effect with the parapet wall string course.
B10. Further view of the rear face of the rear right hand corner pier to the rear block. B11. Internal view towards the rear left hand corner of the rear block – note bay window on rear elevation.
B12. View of right hand elevation above Porte Cochere. B13. View of damage to soffit within the Porte Cochere.
B14. View of left hand elevation of the Porte Cochere. APPENDIX C
Proposed Repair Solution - Helifix Sockfix Tie APPENDIX D
Conservation Discussion Document
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0635-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 24,
"total-input-tokens": 37442,
"total-output-tokens": 4658,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
196,
1
],
[
196,
1527,
2
],
[
1527,
3239,
3
],
[
3239,
5741,
4
],
[
5741,
6640,
5
],
[
6640,
8843,
6
],
[
8843,
10219,
7
],
[
10219,
12534,
8
],
[
12534,
14359,
9
],
[
14359,
15578,
10
],
[
15578,
16528,
11
],
[
16528,
16600,
12
],
[
16600,
16808,
13
],
[
16808,
16808,
14
],
[
16808,
16878,
15
],
[
16878,
17167,
16
],
[
17167,
17304,
17
],
[
17304,
17484,
18
],
[
17484,
17633,
19
],
[
17633,
17937,
20
],
[
17937,
18101,
21
],
[
18101,
18213,
22
],
[
18213,
18272,
23
],
[
18272,
18316,
24
]
]
} |
f280cacbb5d2ba6be24ae22ee237f984897918a6 | Dear Care Colleague
COVID-19 vaccinations and Care Homes: Programme Launch
You will have seen the excellent news that a vaccine has been authorised and care home residents and care home staff are the top priority to get it. This will save lives.
This letter outlines our plans for getting the first vaccine (Pfizer-BioNTech) to care home staff from the first day that vaccinations are available. It sets out the actions that local authorities and care providers should take in the coming days.
The Joint Committee on Vaccination and Immunisations (JCVI) confirmed on Wednesday, in its advice on priority groups for vaccination¹, that adult social care is in its top priority groups. Group 1 is ‘Residents in a care home for older adults and their carers’ and Group 2 includes ‘Frontline health and social care workers’.
Getting the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine to care home residents is challenging because of the requirements for transporting it and the temperature at which it is stored. So our focus, initially, is on vaccinating care home workers and the over 80s.
Vaccines will be available from Tuesday 8 December, initially in up to 50 Hospital Hubs across England. We are working hard to bring a vaccine to those who need it, and over the coming weeks, more Hospital Hubs and other vaccination locations will be operational.
Local Authorities
Local Authorities will play a vital role, working together with the NHS and local care providers to make sure we make the best possible use of initial supplies of the vaccine.
¹ https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/priority-groups-for-coronavirus-covid-19-vaccination-advice-from-the-jcvi-2-december-2020 We will be assisting our NHS colleagues by providing them with information on care homes. Recognising that there are many small care homes, we are asking Local Authorities to work with NHS colleagues and local care homes to ensure that we fill up the available vaccination slots, including by assisting providers, where needed, with their transport plans. I know that through local resilience forums and integrated care systems/STPs, many of you have been planning for this roll-out and that some local authorities will already be linked to the planned Hospital Hubs and Vaccine Centres within their local areas.
The NHS has identified Senior Responsible Officers (SROs) to link local authorities and the social care system. Please notify the Department(^2) of a lead contact within your local authority (or the relevant LRF, as most appropriate) who will be able to liaise directly with NHS colleagues in the Hospital Hubs and other vaccination sites.
**Care Homes**
The people you care for and your staff are the priority for the vaccine, and we want to work with you to get it to them as rapidly as possible to save lives.
The steps here are for two purposes. Firstly, so that your staff can be part of the early wave to be vaccinated in Hospital Hubs, but secondly so that when we can get a vaccine to homes, you'll be ready for it.
In preparation care home managers should:
1. put together staff lists, including basic details (name, gender, date of birth, NHS number, GP details) for each staff member;
2. be ready to provide each staff member with a letter confirming their employment in the care sector;
3. keep staff records of vaccinations and report via the Capacity Tracker (as you do with flu vaccination);
4. consider the covid-secure logistics of releasing staff to receive their vaccine, while maintaining staffing levels within their home. Practical and implementable plans should be in place from early next week; and
5. take steps now to ensure that staff understand need for obtaining consent, so that they in turn can help residents and families to complete the necessary forms when a vaccine is ready to be delivered within a care home. Once issued, these forms will provide additional information about the vaccine they are receiving.
(^2) Contact covidvaccineASC@dhsc.gov.uk We are working on a standardised consent form, as you will need to gain consent to vaccinate as and when we get it to care homes. When we release this form and guidance, please use it to gain consent. You may want to start talking to residents and their families now about the vaccination.
These arrangements are to cover the initial period in which vaccines are available and will be developed and modified when the National Booking System for vaccination becomes available. Initially, local booking systems will be in place with Hospital Hubs.
Looking beyond week one
We are working with the NHS on how we may be able to vaccinate care home residents with the Pfizer-bioNTech vaccine at their care home but given the practical challenges we cannot set out the details for this yet.
We are keeping the operational plans under constant review and if further vaccines are licensed by the Medicines & Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) we will examine the use of these for care home residents.
For queries, Stuart Miller, our Director of Delivery for Adult Social Care, can be contacted via covidvaccineASC@dhsc.gov.uk.
We recognise the scale and the complexity to deliver this vaccination programme is one the greatest challenges we have ever faced. I want to thank you in advance for the crucial part you will play in the vaccination programme, while at the same time continuing all the work you do caring for people and supporting those who care for them.
HELEN WHATELY
Minister for Social Care
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4019-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 3,
"total-input-tokens": 7480,
"total-output-tokens": 1267,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1666,
1
],
[
1666,
3976,
2
],
[
3976,
5489,
3
]
]
} |
0e359d1d5f0b429ebd6cdf34cac2d20d71b7ca35 | Work related musculoskeletal disorder statistics (WRMSDs) in Great Britain, 2020
Contents
Summary 2 Introduction 4 Scale and trend in work-related musculoskeletal disorders 4 Work-related musculoskeletal disorders by industry 5 Work-related musculoskeletal disorders by occupation 6 Work-related musculoskeletal disorders by age and gender 7 Work-related musculoskeletal disorders and workplace size 7 Causes of work-related musculoskeletal disorders 8 Annex 1: Sources and definitions 9 Annex 2: Links to detailed tables 9 Summary
Musculoskeletal disorders in Great Britain
480,000 Workers suffering from work-related musculoskeletal disorders (new or long-standing) in 2019/20 Labour Force Survey (LFS)
8.9 million Working days lost due to work-related musculoskeletal disorders in 2019/20 Labour Force Survey (LFS)
Musculoskeletal disorders by affected area, 2019/20
19% Lower limbs (93,000)
44% Upper limbs or neck (212,000)
37% Back (176,000)
Source: LFS estimate 2019/20
Industries with higher than average rates of musculoskeletal disorders, averaged 2017/18-2019/20
Agriculture, forestry and fishing
Construction
Human health and social work activities
All industries
Source: LFS, estimated annual average 2017/19-2019/20 95% confidence intervals are shown on the chart. Musculoskeletal disorders per 100,000 workers: new and long-standing
The rate of self-reported work-related musculoskeletal disorders shows a generally downward trend
Source: LFS annual estimate, from 2001/02 to 2019/20
- The latest estimates from the Labour Force Survey (LFS) show: The total number of cases of work-related musculoskeletal disorders in 2019/20 was 480,000, a prevalence rate of 1,420 per 100,000 workers. These comprised 212,000 cases where the upper limbs or neck was affected, 176,000 where the back was affected and 93,000 where the lower limbs were affected.
- The rate of work-related musculoskeletal disorders shows a generally downward trend.
- The number of new cases was 152,000, an incidence rate of 450 per 100,000 workers. The total number of working days lost due to this condition in 2019/20 was 8.9 million days. This equated to an average of 18.4 days lost per case. Working days lost per worker due to self-reported work-related musculoskeletal disorders shows a generally downward trend.
- In 2019/20 musculoskeletal disorders accounted for 30% of all work-related ill health cases and 27% of all working days lost due to work-related ill health.
- Musculoskeletal disorders are more prevalent within the industry groups Agriculture, forestry and fishing, Construction and Human health and social work activities. Whereas by occupation rates are higher among skilled trades occupations, Caring, leisure and other service occupations, and among Process, plant and machine operatives.
- The main work factors cited by respondents as causing work-related musculoskeletal disorders were manual handling, working in awkward or tiring positions, and keyboard or repetitive work (2009/10-2011/12).
- Disruption to the economy towards the end of 2019/20 due to the emergence of COVID-19 as a national health issue had the potential to have impacted on workplace injury and work-related ill health data for 2019/20. A paper setting out the issues in more detail along with results of analysis of the headline data from the Labour Force Survey and RIDDOR found that COVID-19 does not appear to be the main driver of changes seen in the latest years data (see Annex 1). Introduction
Musculoskeletal disorders can affect muscles, joints and tendons in all parts of the body. Most WRMSDs develop over time. They can be episodic or chronic in duration and can also result from injury sustained in a work-related accident. Additionally, they can progress from mild to severe disorders. These disorders are seldom life threatening but they impair the quality of life of a large proportion of the adult population.
Work-related disorders can develop in an occupational setting due to the physical tasks with which individuals carry out their normal work activities. WRMSDs are associated with work patterns that include:
- Fixed or constrained body positions
- Continual repetition of movements
- Force concentrated on small parts of the body such as the hand or wrist
- A pace of work that does not allow sufficient recovery between movements
Additionally, workplace psychosocial factors such as organisational culture, the health and safety climate and human factors may create the conditions for WRMSDs to occur. Generally, none of these factors act separately to cause WRMSDs.
HSE’s preferred data source for calculating rates and estimates for WRMSD are self-reports from the Labour Force Survey (LFS). Previously HSE also collected data on WRMSD through The Health and Occupation Research network for general practitioners (THOR-GP). These data although historic provide a general practitioners perspective and are still useful data on work-related causes of musculoskeletal disorders.
Scale and trend in work-related musculoskeletal disorders
In 2019/20 there were an estimated 480,000 workers affected by WRMSDs. This represents 1,420 per 100,000 workers and results in an estimated 8.9 million working days lost. In 2019/20 WRMSDs accounted for 30% of all work-related ill health and 27% of all days lost due to work-related ill-health.
Most of these WRMSDs affect the Upper limbs or neck, 44% of all WRMSD cases, or the Back, 37% of all WRMSD cases with the remaining 19% of cases affecting the lower limbs. However, conditions affecting the back represent a relatively lower proportion of the working days lost than their relative prevalence would suggest. Of all WRMSDs working days lost, conditions affecting the back only account for 22% of these with an estimated 11.2 days lost per case. This compares with conditions affecting the upper limbs and neck that accounts for 50% of these working days lost, (20.8 days lost per case) and conditions affecting the lower limbs that account 28% (26.7 days lost per case).
Figure 1. Estimated prevalence rates of self-reported WRMSDs in Great Britain, for people working in the last 12 months, 2019/20
Source: LFS annual estimate, from 2001/02 to 2019/20 Figure 2. Estimated days lost (full-day equivalent) due to self-reported WRMSDs in Great Britain, for people working in the last 12 months 2019/20
Source: LFS annual estimate, from 2001/02 to 2019/20
Work-related musculoskeletal disorders by industry
The average prevalence rate of WRMSD across all industries was 1,130 cases per 100,000 workers averaged over the period 2017/18-2019/20. The broad industry categories of: Agriculture, forestry and fishing with a rate of 2,030 cases per 100,000 workers; Construction with a rate of 2,020 cases per 100,000 workers, and Human health and social work activities with a rate of 1,420 cases per 100,000 workers all had significantly higher rates than the average for all industries.
Figure 3. Estimated prevalence rates of self-reported WRMSDs in Great Britain, for people working in the last 12 months, by industries with higher rates averaged 2017/18-2019/20
Source: LFS, estimated annual average 2017/19-2019/20
95% confidence intervals are shown on the chart
- indicates estimate based on fewer than 30 sample cases Work-related musculoskeletal disorders by occupation
Skilled trades occupations, Process, plant and machine operatives, and Caring, leisure and other service occupations all had statistically significantly higher rates of WRMSD than the rate for all occupations. For the three-year period averaged over 2017/18-2019/20, Skilled trades occupations had 2,150 cases per 100,000 people employed. Process, plant and machine operatives had 1,720 cases per 100,000 people employed and Caring, leisure and other service occupations had 1,680 cases per 100,000 people employed. This compares with 1,130 cases per 100,000 people employed for all occupational groups over the same period.
A number of smaller occupational groupings many included within the larger groups noted above also had significantly high rates, these included, health professionals, care workers, transport and machine operatives and several construction related occupations.
Figure 4. Estimated prevalence rates of self-reported WRMSDs in Great Britain, for people working in the last 12 months, by occupation, averaged 2017/18-2019/20
Source: LFS, estimated annual average 2017/19-2019/20 95% confidence intervals are shown on the chart. Work-related musculoskeletal disorders by age and gender
The rate of WRMSDs in 2017/18-2019/20 was similar for males and females both with 1,440 cases per 100,000 workers.
There is a clear age gradient evident in both genders with the youngest age category 16 to 34 having significantly lower rates of WRMSDs compared to all ages and the oldest age categories 45 to 54 and 55 years plus having higher rates.
Figure 5. Estimated prevalence rates of self-reported WRMSDs in Great Britain, by age and gender, for people working in the last 12 months, averaged 2017/18-2019/20
Source: LFS, estimated annual average 2017/19-2019/20 95% confidence intervals are shown on the chart.
Work-related musculoskeletal disorders and workplace size
Medium-sized workplaces had a statistically significantly lower average prevalence rate of WRMSDs and large workplaces significantly higher in the latest three-year period (2017/18-2019/20) compared to all workplace size.
Figure 6. Work related musculoskeletal disorders by workplace size 2017/18-2019/20
Source: LFS, estimated annual average 2017/19-2019/20 95% confidence intervals are shown on the chart. Causes of work-related musculoskeletal disorders
The main causes of WRMSD from the Labour Force Survey (2009/10-2011/12) were manual handling, working in awkward or tiring positions and repetitive action or keyboard work.
Figure 7. Estimated prevalence rates of self-reported WRMSDs in Great Britain, by how caused or made worse by work, for people working in the last 12 months, averaged (LFS) 2009/10-2011/12
Source: LFS, estimated annual average 2009/10 -2011/12 95% confidence intervals are shown on the chart
The general practitioner’s network (THOR-GP) from 2013-2015 reported with cases of work-related musculoskeletal disease the main task contributing to the condition. These medical assessed cases indicate a similar pattern to self-reported data from the labour force survey. Heavy lifting akin to manual handling represents the biggest cause in reported cases.
Figure 8. Percentage of WRMSDs reported to THOR-GP according to main attributed task, three-year aggregate total 2013 to 2015 in Great Britain
Source: THOR(GP), data 2013-2015 Annex 1: Sources and definitions
The Labour Force Survey (LFS): The LFS is a national survey run by the Office for National Statistics of currently around 33,000 households each quarter. HSE commissions annual questions in the LFS to gain a view of self-reported work-related illness and workplace injury based on individuals' perceptions. The analysis and interpretation of these data are the sole responsibility of HSE.
- Self-reported work-related illness: People who have conditions which they think have been caused or made worse by their current or past work, as estimated from the LFS. Estimated total cases include long-standing as well as new cases. New cases consist of those who first became aware of their illness in the last 12 months.
- Self-reported injuries: Workplace injuries sustained as a result of a non-road traffic accident, as estimated by the LFS.
Reports of ill health by general practitioners (GPs)(THOR GP): THOR GP is a surveillance scheme in which general practitioners (GPs) are asked to report new cases of work-related ill health. It was initiated in June 2005. Participating GPs report anonymised information about newly diagnosed cases to the Centre for Occupational and Environmental Health (COEH), Manchester University. HSE funding ended in 2016 so the last year of data available to HSE is 2015.
Rate per 100,000: The number of annual workplace injuries or cases of work-related ill health per 100,000 employees or workers.
95% confidence interval: The range of values within which we are 95% confident contains the true value, in the absence of bias. This reflects the potential error that results from surveying a sample rather than the entire population.
Statistical significance: A difference between two sample estimates is described as ‘statistically significant’ if there is a less than 5% chance that it is due to sampling error alone.
For more information, see www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/sources.pdf
Potential impact of COVID-19 on HSE’s main statistical data sources in 2019/20. See www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/adhoc-analysis/covid19-impact19-20.pdf for more detail.
Annex 2: Links to detailed tables
The data in this report can be found in the following tables:
| Tables | Web Address (URL) | |-------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------| | LFS tables | | | Type of illness (LFSILLTYP) | www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/lfs/lfsilltyp.xlsx | | Age and gender (LFSILLAGE) | www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/lfs/lfsillage.xlsx | | Industry (LFSILLIND) | www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/lfs/lfsillind.xlsx | | Occupation (LFSILLOCC) | www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/lfs/lfsillocc.xlsx | | Workplace size (LFSILLSIZ) | www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/lfs/lfsillsiz.xlsx | | How caused or made worse by work (LFSILLHOW) | www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/lfs/lfsillhow.xlsx | | THOR GP tables | | | THORGP11 -MSDs by task/movement | www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/tables/thorgp11.xlsx | | THORGP15- MSDs by anatomical site | www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/tables/thorgp15.xlsx |
More data tables can be found at: www.hse.gov.uk/Statistics/tables/index.htm National Statistics
National Statistics status means that statistics meet the highest standards of trustworthiness, quality and public value. They are produced in compliance with the Code of Practice for Statistics, and awarded National Statistics status following assessment and compliance checks by the Office for Statistics Regulation (OSR). The last compliance check of these statistics was in 2013.
It is Health and Safety Executive’s responsibility to maintain compliance with the standards expected by National Statistics. If we become concerned about whether these statistics are still meeting the appropriate standards, we will discuss any concerns with the OSR promptly. National Statistics status can be removed at any point when the highest standards are not maintained, and reinstated when standards are restored. Details of OSR reviews undertaken on these statistics, quality improvements, and other information noting revisions, interpretation, user consultation and use of these statistics is available from www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/about.htm
An account of how the figures are used for statistical purposes can be found at www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/sources.htm.
For information regarding the quality guidelines used for statistics within HSE see www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/about/quality-guidelines.htm
A revisions policy and log can be seen at www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/about/revisions/
Additional data tables can be found at www.hse.gov.uk/statistics/tables/.
General enquiries: Statistician: simon.clarke@hse.gov.uk
Journalists/media enquiries only: www.hse.gov.uk/contact/contact.htm
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4020-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 10,
"total-input-tokens": 23385,
"total-output-tokens": 4376,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
526,
1
],
[
526,
1295,
2
],
[
1295,
3500,
3
],
[
3500,
6246,
4
],
[
6246,
7318,
5
],
[
7318,
8524,
6
],
[
8524,
9852,
7
],
[
9852,
10907,
8
],
[
10907,
14308,
9
],
[
14308,
15918,
10
]
]
} |
b2feb7bb9257593ff0266908562099804a8daeee | EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
BETWEEN
Claimant Ms Handley
Respondent Office for Legal Complaints
AND
JUDGMENT OF THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNAL
HELD AT Birmingham ON 25 March 2020
EMPLOYMENT JUDGE Harding
Representation For the Claimant: In Person For the Respondent: Ms Watkins, Solicitor
JUDGMENT
By consent the breach of contract claim is dismissed on withdrawal by the claimant.
Employment Judge Harding Dated: 25 March 2020
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4022-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1627,
"total-output-tokens": 170,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
423,
1
]
]
} |
9865a283e5a9e4f2601b94ec9df23309e4bc0c9d | EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant: Ms M Gorman Respondent: Terence Paul (Manchester) Limited
HELD AT: Manchester ON: 11 March 2020 BEFORE: Employment Judge Batten (sitting alone)
Representation For the Claimant: Ms C Brooke-Ward, Counsel For the Respondent: Mr T Wood, Counsel
JUDGMENT ON A PRELIMINARY HEARING
The judgment of the Tribunal is that the claimant was an employee of the respondent.
Employment Judge Batten Date: 11 March 2020
JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON 13 March 2020
FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4023-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1785,
"total-output-tokens": 202,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
513,
1
]
]
} |
ace492d7580f128e2b77782fa59aad9312c65e10 | EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS
Claimant: Ms O Gorton Respondent: TJ Crompton Limited
HEARD AT: Manchester On: 7 December 2020 BEFORE: Employment Judge Batten MEMBERS: Ms A Ashworth Mr P Dobson
REPRESENTATION: For the Claimant: Ms S Houghton, litigation friend For the Respondent: Mr A McMillan, Accountant
JUDGMENT
The unanimous judgment of the Tribunal is that:
1. the claimant’s claim of unfair dismissal is well-founded;
2. the claimant suffered unlawful age discrimination;
3. the respondent is ordered to pay to the claimant the sum of £17,500.00 for injury to feelings together with interest of £1,884.61 pursuant to regulation 6(1)(a) of the Employment Tribunals (Interest on Awards in Discrimination Cases) Regulations 1996; and
4. the respondent is ordered to pay to the claimant the sum of £856.01 for financial losses together with interest of £45.55 pursuant to regulation 6(1)(b) of the Employment Tribunals (Interest on Awards in Discrimination Cases) Regulations 1996.
5. The Employment Protection (Recoupment of Job Seeker’s Allowance and Income Support) Regulations 1996, SI 1996 No. 2349 apply to the following:
(a) Monetary award: £846.09 (b) Prescribed element: £846.09
(c) Period to which (b) relates: 29 August 2019 – 30 September 2019
(d) Excess of (a) over (b): £0.00
6. The claimant’s application for a preparation time order is refused.
______________________________________________________________________
Employment Judge Batten 7 December 2020
JUDGMENT SENT TO THE PARTIES ON
31 December 2020
FOR THE TRIBUNAL OFFICE
Note Reasons for the judgment having been given orally at the hearing, written reasons will not be provided unless a request was made by either party at the hearing or a written request is presented by either party within 14 days of the sending of this written record of the decision.
Public access to employment tribunal decisions Judgments and reasons for the judgments are published, in full, online at www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal-decisions shortly after a copy has been sent to the claimant(s) and respondent(s) in a case. NOTICE
THE EMPLOYMENT TRIBUNALS (INTEREST) ORDER 1990
Tribunal case number: 2414322/19 Ms O Gorton v TJ Crompton Limited
The Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 provides that sums of money payable as a result of a judgment of an Employment Tribunal (excluding sums representing costs or expenses), shall carry interest where the full amount is not paid within 14 days after the day that the document containing the tribunal’s written judgment is recorded as having been sent to parties. That day is known as “the relevant decision day”. The date from which interest starts to accrue is called “the calculation day” and is the day immediately following the relevant decision day.
The rate of interest payable is that specified in section 17 of the Judgments Act 1838 on the relevant decision day. This is known as "the stipulated rate of interest" and the rate applicable in your case is set out below.
The following information in respect of this case is provided by the Secretary of the Tribunals in accordance with the requirements of Article 12 of the Order:-
"the relevant decision day" is: 31 December 2020
"the calculation day" is: 1 January 2021
"the stipulated rate of interest" is: 8%
MR S ARTINGSTALL For the Employment Tribunal Office GUIDANCE NOTE
1. This guidance note should be read in conjunction with the booklet, ‘The Judgment’ which can be found on our website at www.gov.uk/government/collections/employment-tribunal-forms
If you do not have access to the internet, paper copies can be obtained by telephoning the tribunal office dealing with the claim.
2. The Employment Tribunals (Interest) Order 1990 provides for interest to be paid on employment tribunal awards (excluding sums representing costs or expenses) if they remain wholly or partly unpaid more than 14 days after the date on which the Tribunal’s judgment is recorded as having been sent to the parties, which is known as “the relevant decision day”.
3. The date from which interest starts to accrue is the day immediately following the relevant decision day and is called “the calculation day”. The dates of both the relevant decision day and the calculation day that apply in your case are recorded on the Notice attached to the judgment. If you have received a judgment and subsequently request reasons (see ‘The Judgment’ booklet) the date of the relevant judgment day will remain unchanged.
4. “Interest” means simple interest accruing from day to day on such part of the sum of money awarded by the tribunal for the time being remaining unpaid. Interest does not accrue on deductions such as Tax and/or National Insurance Contributions that are to be paid to the appropriate authorities. Neither does interest accrue on any sums which the Secretary of State has claimed in a recoupment notice (see ‘The Judgment’ booklet).
5. Where the sum awarded is varied upon a review of the judgment by the Employment Tribunal or upon appeal to the Employment Appeal Tribunal or a higher appellate court, then interest will accrue in the same way (from “the calculation day”), but on the award as varied by the higher court and not on the sum originally awarded by the Tribunal.
6. ‘The Judgment’ booklet explains how employment tribunal awards are enforced. The interest element of an award is enforced in the same way. ANNEX TO THE JUDGMENT (MONETARY AWARDS)
Recoupment of Benefits
The following particulars are given pursuant to the Employment Protection (Recoupment of Benefits) Regulations 1996, SI 1996 No 2349.
The Tribunal has awarded compensation to the claimant, but not all of it should be paid immediately. This is because the Secretary of State has the right to recover (recoup) any jobseeker’s allowance, income-related employment and support allowance, universal credit or income support paid to the claimant after dismissal. This will be done by way of a Recoupment Notice, which will be sent to the respondent usually within 21 days after the Tribunal’s judgment was sent to the parties.
The Tribunal’s judgment states: (a) the total monetary award made to the claimant; (b) an amount called the prescribed element, if any; (c) the dates of the period to which the prescribed element is attributable; and (d) the amount, if any, by which the monetary award exceeds the prescribed element. Only the prescribed element is affected by the Recoupment Notice and that part of the Tribunal’s award should not be paid until the Recoupment Notice has been received.
The difference between the monetary award and the prescribed element is payable by the respondent to the claimant immediately.
When the Secretary of State sends the Recoupment Notice, the respondent must pay the amount specified in the Recoupment Notice to the Secretary of State. This amount can never be more than the prescribed element of any monetary award. If the amount is less than the prescribed element, the respondent must pay the balance to the claimant. If the Secretary of State informs the respondent that it is not intended to issue a Recoupment Notice, the respondent must immediately pay the whole of the prescribed element to the claimant.
The claimant will receive a copy of the Recoupment Notice from the Secretary of State. If the claimant disputes the amount in the Recoupment Notice, the claimant must inform the Secretary of State in writing within 21 days. The Tribunal has no power to resolve such disputes, which must be resolved directly between the claimant and the Secretary of State.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4024-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 5,
"total-input-tokens": 9535,
"total-output-tokens": 1984,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1159,
1
],
[
1159,
2046,
2
],
[
2046,
3308,
3
],
[
3308,
5367,
4
],
[
5367,
7542,
5
]
]
} |
662bef5d3f93ad1190be695f2a62d201d7928524 | Mayor’s Transport Strategy: Supporting Evidence Challenges and Opportunities for London’s Transport Network to 2041 July 2017 Mayor’s Transport Strategy: Supporting Evidence Challenges and Opportunities for London’s Transport Network to 2041
Executive Summary
The Mayor’s Transport Strategy is the statutory document that sets out the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan’s, policies and proposals to reshape transport in London over the next 25 years. It is an ambitious strategy that puts people’s health and quality of life at the very heart of planning the city’s transport. Along with the new London Plan and the Mayor’s other strategies for economic development, the environment, housing, health inequalities and culture, it provides the blueprint for making London a city that is not only home to more people, but is a better place for all of those people to live in.
TfL has collected evidence to identify the challenges and opportunities facing London’s transport network over the next 25 years. This has formed the basis of the strategy development process, and helps us understand why the priorities and policies outlined in the strategy are relevant and necessary for London. The analytical work presented here includes analysis of past trends, current conditions and modelling of possible futures. It looks at the challenges facing London from the perspective of those who live and work in the city, as well as in terms of the operation of the transport network itself.
The key conclusion is that for London to grow and thrive, it is essential that London’s residents, workers and visitors walk, cycle and use public transport more to improve their health and the environment, to make streets work more efficiently & keep London moving.
London’s transport network has been transformed since 2000, delivering a better experience for customers.
Since TfL was formed in 2000 and the first Mayor of London was elected, London has experienced unprecedented population growth, supported by an expanding and improving transport network. All public transport modes have seen significant increases in capacity and service quality; with innovations on the street network such as congestion charging, cycle hire and superhighways, and technological innovation from Oyster to apps.
Since 2000, there has been substantial mode shift away from the car, bucking national trends for many years.
London has grown rapidly leading to increased demand on the transport system: an average of 26.7 million trips per day were made in London in 2015, 18 per cent more than in 2000. In the period since TfL was formed in 2000, London has achieved an unprecedented shift in travel patterns, with the proportion of trips made by car falling from 47 per cent to 36 per cent and a real terms fall in car travel despite rising numbers of people travelling in the capital. London has become one of the most sustainable major cities in terms of mode share and whilst many other world cities have seen increased car use, we have achieved the reverse.
This shows that change is possible, but the recent rise in car traffic is an urgent reminder that much more needs to be done to deliver mode shift from the car.
This achievement reflected a massive commitment to improving the public transport network, delivering better connectivity, more capacity and a transformed customer experience on London’s rail and bus services. Investment in cycle infrastructure has also paid off, with cycling now the fastest growing mode of travel in London. At the same time, it became less appealing to travel by car as fuel prices and insurance costs rose, congestion increased and parking became more constrained. In central London, the introduction of the Congestion Charge in 2003 reduced traffic by 15 per cent overnight.
Wider societal factors, not all of them positive or desirable, had the effect of making it more likely people would travel by sustainable modes. A disproportionate amount of the population growth took place in denser inner London, and amongst younger working-age adults, particularly non-UK born Londoners, who are less likely to use the car. Amongst the youngest group, license holding fell considerably so that today’s young adults drive less than their predecessors. And although at an aggregate level the London economy was growing, incomes in outer London, where most of the car travel happens, remained stagnant from the early 2000s. In total, nearly all of the factors that influence the patterns of travel demand contributed to the rise of sustainable travel; in future, changes in any of these trends could make it more difficult to continue to reduce car use and help Londoners travel sustainably.
In future, travel patterns will be influenced by what we do, but also by factors outside our control. There is emerging evidence that car traffic is increasing, suggesting the balance of factors influencing demand may be changing.
London is bigger than it has ever been and growing rapidly with the population expected to reach 10.5m by 2041, accompanied by 6.8 million jobs.
This is equivalent to adding two double decker buses full of new residents every day. The shape of the capital is changing, with more older people - the population over 70 is growing between two and three times as fast as average - and 1.8 people with accessibility needs will be living in London by 2041. Employment is also expected to grow, with more than a million additional jobs by 2041, concentrated in central London.
Inevitably, growth on this scale will place significant pressure on the transport network. Total travel will increase by 23 per cent, with 5 million more trips per day by 2041 than today. Analysis has been undertaken to understand how people might travel in future, based upon current trends and the existing investment programme, which includes the opening of Crossrail 1 – the Elizabeth line – and the funded London Underground upgrade programme, as well as HS2 and the delivery of the HLOS and Thameslink upgrade programmes on national rail, but excludes unfunded major projects such as Crossrail 2. This analysis suggests that mode shift from the car will continue, albeit more slowly, with the car mode share falling from 36 per cent to 30 per cent by 2041 based on the current programme. Despite the falling car mode share, traffic will continue to rise if left unchecked.
**Figure E1** Trip-based mode share for travel in London, 2015 and 2041, funded programme without the interventions proposed in the MTS
Source: City Planning
The life expectancy of Londoners has been increasing but adults are living more of their lives in poor health. Most Londoners do not do enough activity to be healthy and travelling actively is the best way to achieve this.
Transport plays a vital role in improving health, and particularly in helping people to be physically active – adults need at least 150 minutes and children 420 minutes of physical activity a week to stay healthy and reduce their risk of common, preventable diseases.
Walking or cycling is one of the best ways to stay active and healthy as it provides regular physical activity integrated into people’s daily routines, particularly for groups who may struggle with more vigorous activity, but can manage to walk a journey. Currently, a third of Londoners achieve their recommended level of physical activity from active travel alone. If everyone in London walked or cycled for 20 minutes each day - including travel to and from public transport stations and stops - this could save £1.7bn in NHS treatment costs over 25 years.
Healthy Streets are safe, inclusive and encourage activity but London’s streets fall short of expectations.
Streets make up 80 per cent of London’s public space so improving the street environment can dramatically improve quality of life in the city. TfL and the GLA have identified ten indicators of a Healthy Street - shown below - necessary to create a safe, inclusive space where people will choose to walk and cycle and spend time. Research shows that London’s streets fall short of the expectations of those using them. As the city gets busier, the street experience could worsen. Figure E2 Ten Indicators of a Healthy Street
Improving air quality delivers benefits for everyone and reduces unfair health inequalities.
London’s streets should be welcoming places for everyone to walk, spend time in and engage in community life.
Making streets easier to cross is important to encourage more walking and to connect communities. People prefer direct routes and being able to cross streets at their convenience. Physical barriers and fast moving or heavy traffic can make streets difficult to cross.
A wider range of people will choose to walk or cycle if our streets are not dominated by motorised traffic, and if pavements and cycle paths are not overcrowded, dirty, cluttered or in disrepair.
Providing shade and shelter from high winds, heavy rain and direct sun enables everybody to use our streets, whatever the weather.
People are more likely to use our streets when their journey is interesting and stimulating, with attractive views, buildings, planting and street art and where other people are using the street. They will be less dependent on cars if the shops and services they need are within short distances so they do not need to drive to get to them.
A lack of resting places can limit mobility for certain groups of people. Ensuring there are places to stop and rest benefits everyone, including local businesses, as people will be more willing to visit, spend time in, or meet other people on our streets.
Walking and cycling are the healthiest and most sustainable ways to travel, either for whole trips or as part of longer journeys on public transport. A successful transport system encourages and enables more people to walk and cycle more often. This will only happen if we reduce the volume and dominance of motor traffic and improve the experience of being on our streets.
Reducing the noise impacts of motor traffic will directly benefit health, improve the ambience of street environments and encourage active travel and human interaction.
The whole community should feel comfortable and safe on our streets at all times. People should not feel worried about road danger or experience threats to their personal safety.
Source: Lucy Saunders Walking is an active and enjoyable way to travel and more people could walk rather than drive.
At present, Londoners walk more than people living elsewhere in the UK, with 30 per cent of all trips in London made on foot. The shift from the car to public transport has brought with it huge increases in the amount of walking done to access stations and stops, but the share of journeys walked all the way has remained the same for several decades. Nevertheless, there is potential to deliver mode shift to walking, particularly for short journeys in outer London currently made by car. Doing so will mean meeting expectations for a Healthy Street environment. Whilst the car remains a cheap and convenient option, people will continue to drive walkable journeys.
Cycling is an efficient and healthy way to get about and there is considerable potential for growth in cycle travel.
Cycling is now a major transport mode in London, with 670 thousand journeys made each day. Cycle growth has been particularly strong in central London, with flows across the central cordon increasing by more than 200 per cent since 2001. The rise of cycling has reflected considerable investment in infrastructure to make the experience safer and more appealing but there is much more to be done in order to truly make London feel like a city for cycling. Cycling is the mode of transport with the greatest untapped potential in London. There are 8.2 million trips currently made by a motorised mode that could feasibly be cycled, with a further 1.6 million that could be cycled part of the way. Many journeys could be cycled in under 20 minutes, and for many journeys cycling would be quicker than the current mode of travel used. Cycling is cheap, efficient and reliable, and most people agree that cycling can be a pleasant way to get about. People that don’t currently cycle in London can be concerned about safety and worried that cycling may not be a convenient option for them – to help them start cycling means overcoming a range of practical and attitudinal barriers. More high quality, safe and pleasant routes, supported by plentiful and secure parking, will encourage new people to start cycling and existing cyclists to cycle more.
Vision Zero for London means our long term vision is to reduce road danger so that no deaths or serious injuries occur on London’s streets – in 2015, nearly 2,100 people were killed or seriously injured on London’s streets.
In 2015, 2,092 people were killed or seriously injured (KSIs) on London’s streets, 42 per cent below the 2005-09 baseline. The previous target was met six years early and London is on-track to achieve the target established in 2015 of a 50 per cent reduction in KSIs by 2020. Current forecasts show that if progress continued at a similar rate, KSIs would continue to fall to around 1,000 by 2040.
However, the proportion of KSIs made up of vulnerable road users has risen, as the greatest reduction has been amongst car occupants, and more than 2,000 people were killed or seriously injured on London’s roads in 2015. Delivering Vision Zero will only be achieved through reducing the dominance of motorised traffic on London’s roads and tackling all sources of road danger. Buses and coaches are disproportionately involved in collisions with pedestrians and cyclists and in the last three years there were on average 200 people killed or seriously injured in collisions involving buses or coaches.
**Improving the safety and security of transport and travelling in London remains a priority**
The recent terror attacks in London and Manchester have highlighted the importance of ongoing efforts to reduce the likelihood and impact of these terrible incidents on London’s streets and public transport networks and to improve the safety and security of transport and travelling.
Crime on the TfL public transport network fell more than 50 per cent between 2005/06 and 2016/17. Concerns about the risk of crime and disorder can act as a barrier to travel – surveys carried out in 2016 found that 18 per cent of Londoners could recall an incident in the last three months which had made them feel worried about their personal safety, and women, black and minority ethnic and disabled Londoners are more likely to be concerned about their safety. In future, reducing crime and improving people’s confidence to travel will be challenging in the context of the threat of terrorism, financial constraints, growing passenger numbers and the changing risk and nature of crime.
**Rising traffic and falling road capacity for private vehicles means that congestion will rise for essential traffic**
Congestion causes stress and frustration, and limits the amount people can travel because journeys are slow and unpredictable. For businesses, congestion costs money as workers spend time queuing in traffic, it is difficult to make deliveries on time, and an unreliable road network harms the reputation of London. Bus journeys become slower and less reliable. Despite a falling car mode share, without further action traffic is expected to rise across much of London, with 8.6 million more kilometres travelled by road on average day in 2041 compared to 2015. Over the same period, the amount of space available for use by general road traffic is expected to reduce by 3 per cent, more in central London. By 2041 the average Londoner could waste two and a half days a year sitting in congested traffic.
In central London, weekday daytime congestion has now returned to levels not seen since the introduction of the Congestion Charge in 2003 and outside of charging hours, traffic, speeds and congestion on the central London road network in the evenings and at weekends are as bad or worse than during charging hours, affecting central London’s appeal as a shopping, leisure and entertainment destination.
**Industry trends and economic growth will lead to more freight traffic, especially vans**
London’s continued success critically relies on safe, reliable, sustainable and efficient goods delivery and servicing – it is estimated that freight adds approximately £7.5 billion to the GVA of London. As London grows, the demand for freight activity will grow accordingly but, as with all travel, we must ensure that this need is met in a way that minimises its negative impact on the rest of the city. Between 2015 and 2041, van traffic is expected to increase by a quarter as a result of trends in ecommerce, an increase in just-in-time deliveries, and lengthening supply chains. For Healthy Streets, we need to achieve population and jobs growth without a matching rise in car travel
Since its invention, the car has provided welcome connectivity and opened up new opportunities. Even in a densely populated city such as London, some journeys can only reasonably be made by car. But the amount of space that can or should be taken up by private road transport is limited, and the population is growing. Over the past 15 years, car use has been falling despite a rising population. Furthermore, car ownership is linked to inactivity – 70 per cent of people without a car do some active travel in a day, compared to 40 to 50 per cent of car owners – and car traffic causes emissions damaging to health and the environment and road danger. Traffic clogged streets deter people from walking and cycling and damage quality of life. Underlying the challenge of delivering Healthy Streets and healthy people in London is a basic need to deliver population and jobs growth without a commensurate rise in car travel.
Three quarters of car trips could be made by a more sustainable mode, but many people are reluctant to change
There remains great potential to deliver mode shift from the car to more sustainable modes across London, and particularly in outer London – 74 per cent of all Londoners’ car trips and 93 per cent of car trips under 2km could feasibly be made by an alternative mode. Some people are more amenable to change than others – the challenge is that the greatest amount of car use happens in places where people are most committed to travelling by car and least willing to change. Delivering mode shift requires changing people’s preferences. In practice, realising the potential that has been identified would mean car travel becoming less appealing and other modes more appealing in terms of their cost, convenience and freedom from stress.
Poor air quality damages health and causes the equivalent of up to 9,400 deaths per year
Transport is the biggest source of emissions damaging to health in London - around half of emissions (NOx and particulate matter) come from road transport. These pollutants are collectively estimated to cause around 9,400 equivalent deaths every year in Greater London and impose an economic cost somewhere between £1.4bn and £3.7bn a year. London is in breach of legal limits on NO2 and while there is no safe level for particulates, does not meet levels recommended by the World Health Organisation of PM smaller than 2.5 micrograms (PM2.5). The communities suffering most from poor air quality are often the most vulnerable and at least 360 primary schools are in areas exceeding safe legal pollution levels.
Under the most recent government plans, London will not comply with legal limits for NO2 until 2025, 15 years after the original deadline and will exceed World Health Organisation levels of PM2.5 until well after 2030. About a quarter of London’s roads are forecast to be non-compliant with NO2 levels in 2020 and of these, four in ten require traffic reductions of at least 25 per cent. Three quarters of road transport particulate matter comes from tyre and brake wear. There are limited technological solutions so only a reduction in road traffic can effectively tackle PM in the medium/long term. Action must be taken to reduce carbon emissions so London can play its part in tackling climate change
Climate change is a serious threat to global quality of life. Carbon dioxide concentration is 40 per cent higher than in pre-industrial times and between 1880 and 2012, the earth’s surface warmed 0.85 degrees Celsius. London’s transport providers must play their part in delivering reductions in carbon emissions. The Mayor’s ultimate ambition is to make London a zero carbon city by 2050 and yet the current situation is that CO₂ emissions from road transport are forecast to reduce by around 50 per cent in 2050 compared to 2013. London’s public transport services are on a pathway to zero emissions; emissions from the largely electrified rail network will fall in line with the decarbonisation of the energy supply. Technological advances will reduce vehicle emissions but this will be made quicker and more feasible if the distance travelled by car is reduced.
London’s transport CO₂ includes emissions arising from the taxiing, take-off and landing of aircraft at Heathrow and City Airports. There is no national policy to fully decarbonise aviation and the expansion of Heathrow would significantly increase CO₂ emissions.
Noise from transport causes stress and damages the health of Londoners
The World Health Organisation identifies environmental noise as the second largest environmental risk to public health in Western Europe. More than 1.6 million people in London are exposed to road traffic noise levels during the day above 55dB, the level defined by the World Health Organisation as causing health problems. Heathrow alone exposes 750,000 people to significant aircraft noise – the majority of whom reside in west and southwest London – and which amounts to 28 per cent of all those exposed to noise by airports across Europe. With a third runway, that number could increase to almost a million people.
A biodiverse natural environment is good for nature and good for people
Transport land accounts for 14 per cent of land in London and how this land is used has a significant impact on biodiversity in London. Nationwide, the goal is to conserve biodiversity. This will be challenging given competing demands for land for housing and transport infrastructure. As London becomes more urban, access to green space will become more important, and transport land can contribute.
The transport network must be resilient to extreme weather and the adverse effects of climate change
London is already suffering from the adverse effects of climate change as summers are getting warmer and winters are getting wetter. Major flooding has occurred in London in three of the last four years, causing significant disruption to transport and having a detrimental impact on the economy. For London to remain an attractive place to live, work and visit, the transport system must be resilient to the extreme weather conditions likely to become more common as a result of a changing climate. London has become more unaffordable as housing and travel costs have risen faster than incomes
Whilst the economy of London has grown, not all Londoners have shared in the benefits. London is one of the most expensive places to live in the world and yet more than a fifth of working Londoners do not receive the London Living Wage. In the early years of TfL, average earnings rose faster than fares, particularly bus fares which were frozen or reduced each year between 2005 and 2008. However, between 2008 and 2015, single Tube and bus fares increased by around 60 per cent. While this allowed for significant investment in transport networks, those on the minimum wage saw their pay rise just 17 per cent, making travel costs a larger proportion of their spending. The Mayor has frozen fares to make travel more affordable. Travel costs becoming unaffordable could make it harder for Londoners to make the journeys they need and want to by public transport.
A good customer experience means consistently getting the basics right and being innovative
A good customer experience means consistently getting the basics right and being innovative. Customers should be able to trust their transport providers to provide a good experience across the network, but overstretched services may struggle to deliver what customers want. Customers will expect services to respond to emerging technology and reflect cultural change - as expectations rise, it will become increasingly difficult to deliver the basics consistently in a crowded and congested environment. In particular, customers expect and deserve a consistent experience and yet satisfaction varies considerably between different rail operators, with customers on Southern and Thameslink services the least satisfied.
An inclusive, accessible, affordable transport network benefits all Londoners. But despite significant improvements, 41 per cent of the public transport network is still not accessible
Journey times are longer on the step-free network and a number of barriers to travel remain. In particular, whilst everyone finds travelling on crowded services unpleasant, for those with accessibility needs crowded services can act as a total barrier to travel. With a fast growing population with accessibility needs - 1.8 million people by 2041 - and more intensely crowded rail services, accessibility risks becoming a more acute challenge as time moves on.
Buses are a space-efficient and affordable mode of transport but falling speeds worsen the experience for users
London’s bus services provide the most extensive public transport network in the capital, offering low cost, accessible travel across London’s residential outer areas as well as a dense network of services in inner and central London. Investment in new services, increased frequencies, bus priority and improved customer experience meant that demand for bus travel grew by 71 per cent between 2000 and 2015 and 3.9 million bus journeys are made in London every day. However, passenger volumes have started to fall in recent years, largely as result of slowing bus speeds and also reflecting changes to travel patterns. It is vital that the huge achievements of the past 15 years are not lost and London does not see a return to car travel. In fact, there is enormous potential to deliver mode shift from car to bus, with around three million journeys that could feasibly be made by bus. Modelling suggests that increasing bus connectivity in outer London in particular could deliver this mode shift; emerging forms of demand responsive bus services could provide a cost effective solution in some cases. To realise this potential, buses will need to provide connectivity and convenience to compete with the car, and bus speeds will need to improve once again.
**Despite tube and rail upgrades and the opening of the Elizabeth line, demand will increase faster than supply by 2041, exacerbating crowding**
In the next five years, London will experience the opening of the first entirely new rail line in a generation and the completion of significant upgrades to the London Underground network. As a result, by 2021, the rail network will be less crowded on average than today, although many lines will still experience very crowded trains. But by 2031, the funded programme will have drawn to a close, and population growth will be placing renewed pressure on the rail network. By 2041, demand will have outstripped supply and in the absence of new rail capacity we can expect to see severe crowding across almost all of the Tube and rail network as it approaches central London, and spreading much further in many cases. Crowding will increase by 50 per cent on London Underground and 90 per cent on national rail services by 2041.
**Crowding in stations causes delays and frustration and will become more common as London grows**
The same demographic and economic factors that lead to busier trains will result in increased passenger numbers at stations across the network. The most significant challenge will arise in central London, where demand for travel at peak periods will rise substantially, placing pressure on key destination stations and interchanges. Congestion within stations leads to delays as passengers move slowly through the station, are forced to wait to board trains, or are held outside the station as safety concerns force temporary closures. By 2041, planned station control measures may be required at 30 key stations, including London Underground stations serving each of the six major National Rail termini. The closure of a London Underground station at a terminus, even for a short time, adds significant pressure to the wider network.
**Passenger safety should always be a top priority**
In recent years, the number of people killed or seriously injured on the London Underground has remained broadly stable, set against growing passenger numbers, and the safety of bus and coach passengers has improved considerably. After many years of safe operation, there was a major tram derailment at Sandilands Junction in November 2016 in which seven people lost their lives and over 50 people were injured. This tragedy serves as a reminder that safety is paramount and that it is vital to work to continuously improve passenger safety despite growing demand for services. The Thames Vision sets a goal of doubling river patronage
Over the last ten years, river patronage has doubled with over 10.5 million people travelling on the river in 2016/17 and the Port of London Authority (PLA) Thames Vision has set a target to double annual river patronage to 20 million and underlying intra-port freight carried by water to over four million tonnes by 2035.
In recent years, there has been an unprecedented rise in the number of licensed private hire drivers and vehicles, leading to concerns around congestion, air quality and compliance
Whilst the number of licensed taxis and licensed taxi drivers in London has remained stable for many years, the number of private hire vehicles (PHVs) has increased by 58 per cent since 2008/09, with the number of licensed drivers increasing by 81 per cent over the same period.
Coaches provide affordable long distance transport options; Victoria Coach Station currently operates at or close to capacity and is in need of substantial refurbishment.
Coaches provide affordable long distance transport options; however, TfL does not operate services directly but has historically provided the London terminus at Victoria Coach Station. 14 million passengers a year travel by coach in and out of Victoria Coach Station, to 1,200 destinations in the UK and abroad. A study has concluded that a central hub in zone 1 needs to be maintained, with supporting hubs around London.
New homes and jobs
London is vital to economic growth across the UK – it is the most productive region and is the UK’s only global centre
London sits at the heart of the UK economy, accounting for just under a quarter of national economic output. It plays a unique role as a global employment hub, one of a small number of very large cities around the world. The centre hosts a cluster of globally competitive sectors, and accommodates a third of London’s jobs in just 2 per cent of its area. 45 per cent of GVA was generated in just six central Boroughs, making this the most productive part of the UK. Central London has grown more than elsewhere, yet compared to other similar cities there remains scope to increase its density and productivity.
Jobs in central London depend on rail capacity; by 2041 demand will outstrip supply, possibly limiting growth
All of London’s key employment centres are in locations which can be reached by more than two million people within 45 minutes and this is where the most growth is expected, with three quarters of a million additional people expected to be working in central London and the Isle of Dogs by 2041. Transport capacity constraints can limit this connectivity and may lead to lost economic potential if crowding starts to deter people from working in the centre. A crowded network, with the frustrations and inefficiencies this brings will eventually act to constrain the available labour market and encourage businesses to look elsewhere to invest. New rail capacity will be required to meet demand and ensure London’s economy can continue to thrive.
**Beyond the centre, travel is more car dependent but town centres could become sustainable travel hubs**
At least four in ten journeys made by London residents start or end in a town centre and town centres also act as transport hubs, with larger town centres all served by Tube or rail services and multiple bus routes. Whilst London residents are less likely to drive to town centres than other destinations, nevertheless, on an average day, there are 1.5 million car trips to town centres. As our shopping habits change, the role of town centres is changing, with retail consolidating in larger centres.
**London needs 50,000 new homes a year but is delivering half that - transport investment can unlock development**
To meet the needs of London’s current and future population, 50,000 new homes are needed every year, equivalent to a new home every 11 minutes, 24 hours a day for the next 25 years, but only around half this have been delivered in recent years. A constrained housing supply means people are paying more to live in worse conditions. In the long term, a constrained housing market will deter people from living and working in London and threaten economic growth.
Transport has a key role in unlocking housing development. Homes in the best connected areas command a price premium, currently 2.5 per cent for Crossrail 1 above surrounding areas, and a disproportionate amount of development has taken place in very well connected areas.
**Many of the areas with the greatest capacity for development have poor transport connectivity, hampering development**
London’s Opportunity Areas are the largest reservoir of developable land, but many suffer from poor transport connectivity at present. Investing in new public transport capacity could unlock the delivery of hundreds of thousands of homes that may not otherwise come forward for development. In particular, it is estimated that Crossrail 2 alone could support 200,000 new homes and 200,000 jobs along its route. TfL as a landowner can contribute directly to the supply of housing; TfL is the owner of 5,700 acres of public land in London and sites have been identified that could potentially deliver 10,000 homes over the next five years.
**London’s low density sprawl has contributed to high car use, new developments should make it easy to travel sustainably**
Where people live to a large extent determines their travel patterns: car ownership and use is higher in places where access to jobs, shops and services depends on the car. People living in more densely populated areas, close to shops and services, and with access to good public transport services are more likely to travel by public transport, cycling and walking and less likely to travel by car. The car mode share for those living the furthest from a town centre is nearly three times that of those living very close to a town centre. Similarly, commute patterns are determined by how well served workplaces are by public transport. How people commute is particularly important because people who need a car for work are far more likely to drive all their other journeys as well.
Car ownership and use also tends to be higher where there is better parking provision, based on the assumption that off-street parking is better than on-street, and that unpermitted parking is better than permitted. In inner London, there is some evidence that the cost of parking is deterring people from owning and running a car. In new developments, there is clear evidence that more parking means more car use than would be seen otherwise.
In summary, it is clear that the situation and design of new housing will determine the travel patterns of its residents. Higher density, well connected housing, offering a good quality environment for walking and cycling, and with limited parking provision, will encourage people to travel sustainably. Equally, in order to prevent rising car travel, new employment should be well connected by public transport and active modes to the potential workforce, with limited parking, to deter commuting by car.
Conclusion
Figure E3 summarises the challenges and opportunities London’s transport network will face over the next 25 years. Analysis of the challenges and opportunities facing London provides the evidence base for the draft Mayor’s Transport Strategy.
Figure E3 Challenges and opportunities facing London’s transport network between 2015 and 2041
London will be bigger than ever with 32m trips daily. 70% will be by PT and active modes, but without further action traffic will rise with more car and many more van kilometres on the roads. Growth places pressure on the transport network but brings considerable economic benefits to London and the UK.
There is an opportunity to deliver a bigger, better city by investing in transport:
1. Healthy Streets can create vibrant, clean, safe and inclusive places and encourage people to be active.
2. We can build on our unrivalled success in delivering mode shift from the car to deliver a world-leading sustainable travel mode share.
3. We have proven the benefits of investing in public transport and focussing on our customers.
However, failing to meet our challenges risks:
1. Jobs growth won’t materialise & high value jobs will go to global centres outside the UK.
2. But population growth - largely driven by an ageing population – is likely to continue risking worsening conditions.
3. Unhealthy streets and a worsening customer experience on the transport network
We face a number of key challenges:
Delivering Healthy Streets that meet expectations and tackle the physical inactivity crisis threatening health
Reducing emissions to minimise the health impact of transport and work towards a zero carbon London
Tackling car use and prioritising streets for active modes, buses and essential car and freight traffic
Ensuring the transport network is accessible, fair, affordable and safe for all
Delivering a reliable public transport service despite growing passenger numbers
Support the delivery of the homes and jobs that London needs through investing in transport
Fundamentally, our challenge is to manage the competing demands for space and meet our goals by:
Delivering mode shift from the car to walking, cycling and public transport
Supporting growth through the provision of new public transport capacity to employment hubs
Ensure new homes are delivered in a way that makes it easy for people to choose sustainable modes
‘Keeping up’ and ensuring technological advances deliver a better London
## Contents
**Executive Summary**\
1
**Contents**\
14
1 **Introduction**\
16
2 **Travel patterns, trends and forecasts**\
17
2.1 Population\
18
2.2 Employment\
24
2.3 Current travel patterns and trends\
27
2.4 Understanding the drivers of demand\
30
2.5 Future travel patterns\
34
2.6 Summary: Travel patterns, trends and forecasts\
36
3 **The health challenge**\
38
3.1 The health challenge\
39
3.2 Healthy Streets\
41
3.3 Summary: The health challenge\
45
4 **Healthy Streets and healthy people**\
46
4.1 Walking\
47
4.2 Cycling\
53
4.3 Reducing road danger\
60
4.4 Personal safety and security\
62
4.5 Traffic and congestion\
64
4.6 Freight\
76
4.7 Car ownership and use\
80
4.8 Summary: Healthy Streets and healthy people\
92
5 **Environment**\
95
5.1 Air quality\
96
5.2 Climate change\
101
5.3 Noise and the natural and built environment\
104
5.4 Summary: Environment\
108
6 **A good public transport experience**\
110
6.1 London’s public transport network\
112
6.2 Affordability\
115
6.3 Customer service\
117 6.4 Accessibility 120 6.5 Shaping the bus network 123 6.6 Crowding on public transport 130 6.7 Stations 143 6.8 Passenger safety on the public transport network 148 6.9 River services 150 6.10 Taxis and private hire vehicles 151 6.11 Coach travel 154 6.12 Summary: A good public transport experience 155
7 New homes and jobs 158 7.1 Unlocking new jobs 160 7.2 Unlocking new homes 166 7.3 Relationship between housing density and sustainable travel 172 7.4 Relationship between public transport connectivity and sustainable travel 176 7.5 Relationship between parking and sustainable travel 180 7.6 How the design and location of new developments influences sustainable travel 184 7.7 Summary: New homes and jobs 185 1 Introduction
The Mayor’s Transport Strategy is the statutory document that sets out the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan’s, policies and proposals to reshape transport in London over the next 25 years. It is an ambitious strategy that puts people’s health and quality of life at the very heart of planning the city’s transport. Along with the new London Plan and the Mayor’s other strategies for economic development, the environment, housing, health inequalities and culture, it provides the blueprint for making London a city that is not only home to more people, but is a better place for all of those people to live in.
TfL has collected evidence to identify the challenges and opportunities facing London’s transport network over the next 25 years. This has formed the basis of the strategy development process, and helps us understand why the priorities and policies outlined in the strategy are relevant and necessary for London. The analytical work presented here includes analysis of past trends, current conditions and modelling of possible futures. It looks at the challenges facing London from the perspective of those who live and work in the city, as well as in terms of the operation of the transport network itself.
The key conclusion is that for London to grow and thrive, it is essential that London’s residents, workers and visitors do more walking and cycling and use public transport more to improve their health and the environment, to make streets work more efficiently & keep London moving.
The structure of the report is as follows:
Chapter 1 introduces the purpose of the report and its structure.
Chapter 2 sets out TfL’s expectations of how London will grow and the implications for the demand for travel, looking at the characteristics of that growth and exploring the drivers of travel demand.
Most Londoners are not sufficiently active for their health. Chapter 3 presents the health challenge and describes the Healthy Streets approach.
Chapter 4 describes the challenges and opportunities in delivering Healthy Streets and healthy people, including the need to increase active travel, deliver an improved street environment, tackle road danger and reduce dependence on the car.
Chapter 5 describes the environmental challenges – in terms of air quality, tackling climate change and adapting to its impacts, and tackling noise disturbance. It also describes the challenges for London’s natural and urban environment.
Chapter 6 presents the challenges faced in delivering a good public transport experience for all, looking at bus and rail services in turn. It explores the challenge of delivering affordable, accessible and safe services.
Chapter 7 outlines the role of transport in unlocking new homes and jobs, and explores the relationship between a range of factors and sustainable travel choices in order to identify the characteristics of ‘good growth’ that can benefit everyone. 2 Travel patterns, trends and forecasts
This section describes how the population and economy of London has changed in the past and presents the forecasts of what is expected to happen in future. The section also describes the likely impact of population and employment growth on travel demand – the amount of travel people do and the characteristics of that travel – in London over the next 25 years to 2041.
Travel patterns, trends and forecasts: key findings
- The primary drivers of travel demand at the aggregate level are population growth and employment growth. London’s population is forecast to grow 22 per cent by 2041, and the level of employment in London is forecast to increase by 20 per cent. This growth in population and employment means that travel demand will increase substantially to 2041.
- At a more detailed level, the growth in travel demand on different modes and in different locations will be influenced by changes in London’s demographics and economic structure. Factors such as the changing age profile of Londoners – including a forecast increase in the number of residents aged over 65 – will influence where and when travel demand occurs. Similarly, the spatial distribution of new homes and jobs will determine where increases in additional demand will occur. With central London employment forecast to continue to grow, much of the increase in travel demand will be experienced on peak-time radial rail modes.
- The net effect of the various influences on travel demand is forecast to lead to an increase in the total number of trips made daily from 26.7 million to 32 million. There is forecast to be some growth in car travel, mainly in Outer London, as well as a rise in the amount of van traffic. However, the vast majority of the increase in travel is instead accounted for by growth in public transport and cycling trips. 2.1 Population
Growth to 2041
London is expecting to see rapid growth in population over the coming decades. In 2015, London’s population topped 8.6 million, the highest it’s ever been. The GLA’s latest forecast (released in July 2016) is that London’s population is expected to reach 9.9 million by 2031 and 10.5 million by 2041. This is 22 per cent higher than today, 28 per cent higher than at the last census in 2011, and is equivalent to adding the combined populations of Birmingham and Glasgow.
Figure 1 shows how the population of London has grown since 1801, and how it is expected to grow in future. London has changed radically over the past two decades. Following a long period of population decline, population growth returned to London in the 1990s. At the last peak, in the 1930s, the populations of inner and outer London were broadly equivalent. Today, the shape of the capital is different with a more dispersed population. Outer London’s suburban lifestyles were facilitated first by the expansion of local rail and Tube networks and later by the car. They were accompanied by a huge rise in car ownership and use, with both also strongly associated with rising incomes.
Figure 1 Historical and Forecast Population in London, 1801 to 2041
Source: City Planning
London’s Changing Demography
Over the past five years, London’s growth has outstripped expectations, with the population in 2015 already far higher than forecast in the 2011 London Plan, as shown in Figure 2. Over the past decade, population growth has been driven by two factors: strong growth in the number of births in London (21 per cent increase since 2002) and high levels of net international migration. This has been partly balanced by large numbers of people leaving London for the rest of the UK. High growth has been seen in the number of younger people of working age, with very low growth in the population aged 65 and over. Figure 3 shows that in 1971 there was a fairly similar number of people in each five year age group between ages 30 and 64, whereas by 2011 the population aged 25 to 35 was far higher than that aged 50 plus. This is in marked contrast to the rest of the UK where the proportion of the population aged 60 and over has increased from 19 per cent to 27 per cent since 1971. London residents are also far more likely to have been born outside the UK than residents of the country as a whole, as shown in Figure 4. Figure 3 London's Population by Age, 1971 to 2011
Source: City Planning
Figure 4 Population by place of birth, London and UK, 2015
Source: City Planning In comparison, the characteristics of the growing population are expected to be different in the future:
- The number of births, which has grown in recent years, is expected to remain stable at around 130,000 per year, with net natural change (i.e. births minus deaths) at around 80,000 per year.
- Consequently, growth is expected to be stronger amongst those aged 65 and over, particularly from 2020 onwards. The number of London residents aged 70 and over is expected to be 85 per cent higher in 2041 than in 2014.
- Net international migration to London is expected to fall slightly, to around 80,000 per year. This will be matched by a net increase in domestic migration out of London. From 2025, it is expected that over 100,000 London residents will move to other parts of the UK each year.
This means that, in future, it is expected that more people will leave London than arrive but that this will be offset by a growing number of older people living in the city. Travel patterns vary between different groups and between residents of different parts of London. Therefore, the impact of population growth on travel will be different depending on where it occurs and the characteristics of the emerging population, as shown in Figures 5 and 6. A larger population of older people will mean increased demand for travel outside peak periods and on road-based modes, and will also create a greater need for accessible services. Conversely, if the pattern of population growth continues to follow the trends seen over the past 15 years, this would place even more pressure on peak hour services than described in this report.
**Figure 5**\
Age profile of weekday trips by start hour, London residents, 2005/06, 2008/09 and 2014/15
!\[Age profile of weekday trips by start hour, London residents, 2005/06, 2008/09 and 2014/15\](source: City Planning) Spatial Distribution of Population Growth
Where population growth happens will determine where travel demand pressures will become particularly intense, and will also affect the character of that demand. Inner London residents tend to travel more, compared to Outer London residents, and are more likely to use public transport. Outer London residents tend to use cars more, and so growth here may lead to a particular increase in car travel. Older adults tend to live in the least connected parts of Outer London and this is forecast to continue, as shown below in Figure 7. This will continue to present challenges for transport provision as these areas are harder to serve by public transport and have more car orientated travel patterns.
Over the last decade, growth has been highest in the east of London and this is expected to continue. Figure 8 shows the expected distribution of growth across London, with high concentrations in east London, south London at Croydon, and northwest London at Brent Cross and Old Oak Common. Figure 7 Forecast distribution of residents aged 67 and over by 2041
Source: City Planning
Figure 8 Spatial distribution of population growth in London, 2011 to 2041
Source: City Planning 2.2 Employment
Growth to 2041
Employment in London has also grown rapidly, from 4.6 million jobs in 2000 to 5.7 million jobs in 2016 and is projected to grow to 6.25 million by 2031 and 6.75 million by 2041.
London’s employment offer not only provides opportunities for London’s residents but attracts people from across the country and the ‘commuter belt’ extends into the Home Counties. At present, approaching 800,000 people commute into London and the GLA estimates that this will grow to more than a million by 2041. It is anticipated that around 350,000 London residents will commute to jobs outside London by 2041.
Focus on the Central Activities Zone (CAZ)
The Central Activities Zone (CAZ) extends from Chelsea and Kensington through Westminster to the City and reaches north into Camden and south into Southwark and Lambeth, as shown in Figure 9. Together with the North Isle of Dogs, it covers London’s geographic, economic and administrative core. It brings together the largest concentration of London’s financial and globally-oriented business services. Almost a third of all London jobs are based there and, together with North Isle of Dogs, it has historically experienced the highest rate of growth in London and the UK.
Figure 9 Map of the Central Activities Zone
Source: City Planning Figure 10 shows the distribution of employment growth expected between 2011 and 2041. In future, agglomeration will see employment growth concentrated in the central area. 1.4 million jobs are expected in the City of London and Westminster alone. Tower Hamlets – containing Canary Wharf and the Isle of Dogs – will contain 450,000 jobs. Stratford and Old Oak also have the potential to become major hubs. This growth is expected to be driven by expansion of the office-based business services sector, as well as more jobs in retail and leisure services.
**Figure 10 Spatial distribution of employment growth in London to 2041**
The capital's excellent radial connectivity allows a very large number of firms and workers to be located in a small geographic area in central London. The proximity of all of these firms and workers has the effect of increasing the productivity of each through the phenomenon of economies of agglomeration. Continued employment growth will, however, place significant strain on the public transport network and in particular on rail modes. Profile of Employment in London
London’s employment profile has changed over the past 15 years. Manufacturing has been declining and jobs in professional services, health and education have been increasing. Overall there has been a loss of comparatively lower density employment and an increase in comparatively higher density employment uses. These sectoral trends are predicted to continue with manufacturing and wholesale predicted to decline by 80 per cent and 40 per cent respectively by 2041 (compared to 2011) while professional services are predicted to increase by almost 80 per cent, followed by over a 50 per cent increase of jobs in administrative/support services, information/communication and accommodation and food respectively. These jobs are more likely to be located in Central London and town centres, with workers commuting by public transport rather than by car. This is expected to have an impact on travel demand, with public transport mode shares expected to increase and the car mode share to reduce for travel to work.
Strategic Industrial Locations (SIL) are London’s main reservoir of industrial land, comprising about 50 per cent of London’s total supply. Demand for SIL is projected to change – 744 hectares of industrial land is projected to be released between 2011 and 2031, while demand for warehousing is projected to increase by 329 hectares.
Release of industrial land and associated intensification of employment uses may result in a change in travel patterns, with a reduction or change in commuting trips where employment land has been released or transformed into office based employment; and an increase in freight related traffic where land is converted to warehousing. Where industrial land is transformed into office based employment, a mode shift can be encouraged if the right public transport infrastructure is in place. These structural changes to industrial land are particularly expected in east and west London. 2.3 Current Travel Patterns and Trends
Trends to Date
In 2015, there were 26.7 million daily trips on London’s transport network, an 18 per cent increase from 2000. Of these around 36 per cent - 9.6 million trips - were made by car, with the remainder by public transport and/or walking and cycling.
Trip rates in London have remained broadly stable for decades and so the total volume of travel has reflected the number of people living and working in the city. Notably, however, in the 1990s, population growth was not accompanied by equivalent growth in car travel, and from 2000 onwards demand for car travel began to fall. Between 2000 and 2015, the car mode share fell by 10.4 percentage points from 47 to 36 per cent, shown in Figure 11. Over the same period, particularly strong rises were seen in the use of bus, cycle and rail, as shown in Figure 12.
Figure 11 Mode share of trips in London, 2000 and 2015
Source: City Planning Over this period, London has become one of the most sustainable major cities in terms of mode share. Whilst many other world cities have increased car use, motorisation, defined as cars per thousand inhabitants, fell in London from 334 in 1995 to 307 in 2012. Figure 13 provides a global comparison. Of the cities that participate in the UITP comparison study, London is now the least motorised developed city other than Hong Kong and Singapore. The different demographic and structural factors influencing travel choices mean that mode share varies across London. There has been a marked shift away from car travel in Inner London – down from 27 per cent in 2005/06 to 20 per cent in 2014/15. Most of this shift has been towards active travel (up five percentage points) alongside public transport (up two percentage points).
In Outer London a more complicated picture emerges. The car mode share fell by four percentage points, with a six percentage point increase in public transport mode share, a one percentage point increase in cycle mode share, but a four percentage point reduction in walk mode share.
Figure 14 shows the share of journeys by origin and destination of the trip between different regions of London. This clearly demonstrates the continuing dominance of the car for travel within outer London and between inner and outer London.
**Figure 14 Mode share of trips by origin and destination, 2015**
Source: City Planning 2.4 Understanding the Drivers of Demand
TfL has sought to understand why the mode shift from car to more sustainable modes has happened. Travel demand is a complicated function of many factors including: population, demographics, economy, incomes, supply of public and private transport, public and private transport network ‘quality’, and costs of travel in terms of both money and time. TfL’s ‘Drivers of Demand’ study identified three categories of factors determining travel demand: supply side factors, underlying demand and structural change.
Supply Factors
The supply changes that have influenced travel trends are perhaps the best understood. The investment that has been made in the public transport network, improving both capacity and quality, has led to an increase in demand on these modes. In contrast, capacity for general traffic on London’s road network has declined over the long term, making car travel less appealing again relative to public transport in terms of journey time. In addition, changes to parking policy and regulation introduced in the mid-1990s have continued to have an effect on the total quantity of parking spaces available and restrictions on their use.
The cost of travelling by both car and public transport has risen, but the increase in public transport connectivity and the quality of the journey experience by public transport meant that this has not suppressed demand for travel by bus and rail.
Underlying Demand Factors
Underlying demand factors such as London’s economic output, as measured by GVA (Gross Value Added) and household incomes have also influenced travel. Income is an important factor, not only because people with higher incomes make more trips, but also because income influences individuals’ choices about which modes of transport they use. The long term trend for rising incomes was disrupted by the recession, and per capita incomes in London have fallen in real terms in recent years. The influence that income may have had on the observed trends appears stronger again when Inner London and Outer London residents’ incomes are disaggregated. Inner London saw real incomes increase by 18 per cent from 2003 to their peak in 2009, while in Outer London there has been no increase since 2003. With the majority of car travel taking place in Outer London, this stagnation in incomes may have placed a cap on the amount of car travel, while Inner London has benefitted to a greater extent from public transport improvements, and has seen car travel fall despite rising incomes.
Structural Changes
In addition to the supply and demand influences that have been in effect, it appears there have been some structural changes in the drivers of travel demand in recent years. Changes in attitudes toward car ownership and use - perhaps partly a result of improved public transport services and the increased cost of taking up motoring - mean that London’s youngest residents are now much less likely to hold a driving licence than previous generations. Another area of significant change has been in the types and locations of employment that take place in London, with the distinction between blue and white collar workers that was once linked to travel characteristics no longer appearing relevant. Working arrangements have also evolved, with a higher proportion of the population now working part-time – a characteristic often associated with higher rates of travel.
London has also seen continued in-migration, including from EU accession states, while the rate of out-migration has slowed, resulting in increasing numbers of families with children living in the capital. The proportion of Londoners born in EU states other than the UK and Ireland rose from 3 per cent in 2001 to 11 per cent in 2011. That many of these migrants are more likely not to own cars and to live in Inner London explains part of the phenomenon of increasing population without increasing car use.
A further influence on London-wide travel also relates to the Inner and Outer London distinction. Over the past 20 years, Inner and Outer London have seen roughly equal growth in population, despite the fact that Outer London is approximately four times the area of Inner London. With Inner London residents making only half the number of car trips of their Outer London counterparts – a pattern that is constant across the spectrum of income bands – the accelerating densification of Inner London relative to Outer London has also contributed to sustained mode shift toward walking, cycling and public transport.
Crucially, the Drivers of Demand study found that almost every area had seen significant changes that supported modal shift away from car travel to public transport, walking and cycling, with very few factors pushing in the opposite direction. A change or reversal in any of these factors could make continued mode shift more challenging in future. Figure 15 summarises the findings and challenge ahead. Figure 15 Drivers of Demand
| Supply | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2016 | 2021 | 2031 | |--------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Bus capacity | 2.7% pa growth | 6% pa growth | 1.3% pa growth | Keep pace with population | | Underground capacity | | 1.6% pa growth | | Crossrail & Tube Upgrades | | Bus single fare | 8% pa fall | | 6% pa rise | | Dependent on fares policy | | Bus season pass | 8% pa fall | 13% pa rise | Flat | 8% pa rise | | Dependent on fares policy | | Underground single fare | Flat | 6% pa fall | 7% pa rise | | Dependent on fares policy | | Travelcard | Flat | | 1% pa rise | | Dependent on fares policy | | Customer satisfaction | | | | | Further improvements | | Outer highway capacity | 1% pa growth | | 1% pa reduction | | Expected to stabilise | | Inner Highway capacity | | | 1.2% pa reduction | | Aspirations lead to reductions | | Fuel cost | 4.5% pa rise | 4.4% pa fall | 1.6% pa rise | 10% pa rise | Forecast to rise | | Parking | | | | | Dependent on policy |
| Underlying demand | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2016 | 2021 | 2031 | |-------------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Population growth | Population growth of 2.5% pa | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Outer London incomes | 2.5% pa growth | Flat | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Inner London economy | 5.8% pa growth | 2.3% pa growth | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Outer London economy | 4.6% pa growth | Flat | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Structural | 1995 | 1996 | 1997 | 1998 | 1999 | 2000 | 2001 | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2016 | 2021 | 2031 | |-------------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------|------| | Population distribution | Disproportionate share of population growth in inner London | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Migration | Increase in non-UK born Londoners, many with profiles matching low levels of car ownership and use | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Licence holding | Decreasing driving licence holding amongst young Londoners | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Unknown factors | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Legend
- Unknown or data break
- Contributor to more car travel
- Broadly neutral effect
- Contributor to less car travel
- Stronger trend away from car
Source: City Planning Change in travel patterns between the generations
There is evidence that younger generations are travelling differently to the generations that came before them and in particular that they are less likely to drive. While all age groups had lower car driver trips rates in 2014/15 than in 2005/06, the reductions were larger among younger age groups. Over the last 10 years car driver trip rates fell by around 25 per cent among Londoners in their 20s, with sequentially smaller reductions among each age band up to those in their 60s and 70s, who each had around a 10 per cent lower car driver trip rate in 2014/15 than in 2005/06.
Analysis of three large-scale surveys of personal travel in London, spanning the period 1991-2011, shows both the way that travel patterns change over the life cycle, and clear evidence of a ‘cohort effect’ such that as each generation moves through their lives, their car use rises, but each generation is driving less than their predecessors – shown in Figure 16. Young people in their late teens and 20s are less likely to hold a driving licence and be the main user of a car than their predecessors. Behaviour in relation to car ownership illustrates similar generational lag effects, with people currently in older age groups tending to maintain travel patterns established in their earlier working age years, while contemporary young people have by comparison a much reduced propensity to obtain the means to drive. What these (younger) people do next, and identifying the opportunities to influence their decisions, will be a major factor influencing travel demand patterns in London in future years.
Figure 16 Car driver trip rates by age and region, 1991, 2001 and 2011
Source: City Planning 2.5 Future Travel Patterns
The Mayor’s Transport Strategy relies upon an understanding of what could happen in the future without the measures proposed in the draft strategy. TfL maintains a suite of transport demand models that predict future travel patterns. Using these models, a Reference Case has been produced to build on our understanding of current travel patterns and present possible future travel volumes, distribution and mode share. The Reference Case for 2041 represents a future demand scenario if no further action was taken beyond schemes already funded. This has formed the basis of much of the analysis identifying the challenges and opportunities facing London and its transport network over the period to 2041.
The Reference Case is based upon GLA population and employment projections, shown in Figure 17.
Figure 17 Population and employment assumptions, Reference Case
| | Population (millions) | Employment (millions) | |----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------| | | 2015 | 2041 | 2015 | 2041 | | Central London | 0.2 | 0.3 | 1.9 | 2.3 | | Inner London | 3.2 | 3.9 | 1.5 | 1.9 | | Outer London | 5.2 | 6.2 | 2.2 | 2.5 | | Greater London | 8.7 | 10.5 | 5.6 | 6.8 |
Source: City Planning
The Reference Case assumes the delivery of a funded programme of investment from TfL and other transport providers. The major schemes included in the funded programme are:
- The opening of the Elizabeth line from 2019
- Northern line extension to Battersea and Nine Elms and upgrades of the Jubilee, Victoria, Northern and sub-surface lines
- Capacity and frequency enhancements, and electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking line on London Overground
- Capacity and frequency enhancements on the DLR
- Delivery of HS2, the HLOS and Thameslink upgrade schemes on national rail
The modelling also includes some key assumptions determining future travel patterns. These have been derived from DfT guidance and TfL analysis of trends. Key assumptions include:
- The economy is expected to grow, so that values of time increase.
- The number of cars owned per person is expected to fall, but the population increase is so high that the total number of cars rises.
- Highway capacity for general traffic is expected to reduce in the early years due to measures to promote cycling amongst other things.
- The cost of car use is expected to fall over time, as technology improves vehicle efficiency, but parking costs are expected to increase.
In the Reference Case, travel demand is expected to increase to around 32 million trips on an average day in 2041, 5 million more than today. Analysis based upon current trends and the funded programme (so, without the interventions proposed in the draft Mayor’s Transport Strategy) suggests that most of the additional travel demand will be more public transport, walking and cycling. Figure 18 shows the current trip-based mode share and the expected mode share for 2041 without the Mayor’s Transport Strategy.
Among public transport modes, rail and Underground will see the largest growth, with daytime passenger kilometres increasing by more than 50 per cent between 2015 and 2041. Bus passenger kilometres are forecast to increase by around 18 per cent.
Despite a falling car mode share, car kilometres will rise by around 8 per cent. This reflects the distribution of trips, with more car travel in outer London where trips are longer. This, coupled with a large rise in van traffic of 26 per cent, will lead to an overall rise in traffic on the network if left unchecked.
**Figure 18 Trip volumes and mode shares, 2015 and 2041, Reference Case**
 2.6 Summary: travel patterns, trends and forecasts
London’s transport network has been transformed since 2000, delivering a better experience for customers.
Since TfL was formed in 2000 and the first Mayor of London was elected, London has experienced unprecedented population growth, supported by an expanding and improving transport network. All public transport modes have seen significant increases in capacity and service quality; with innovations on the street network such as congestion charging, cycle hire and superhighways, and technological innovation from Oyster to apps.
Since 2000, there has been substantial mode shift away from the car, bucking national trends for many years.
London has grown rapidly leading to increased demand on the transport system: an average of 26.7 million trips per day were made in London in 2015, 18 per cent more than in 2000. In the period since TfL was formed in 2000, London has achieved an unprecedented shift in travel patterns, with the proportion of trips made by car falling from 47 per cent to 36 per cent and a real terms fall in car travel despite rising numbers of people travelling in the capital. London has become one of the most sustainable major cities in terms of mode share and whilst many other world cities have seen increased car use, we have achieved the reverse.
This shows that change is possible, but the recent rise in car traffic is an urgent reminder that much more needs to be done to deliver mode shift from the car.
This achievement reflected a massive commitment to improving the public transport network, delivering better connectivity, more capacity and a transformed customer experience on London’s rail and bus services. Investment in cycle infrastructure has also paid off, with cycling now the fastest growing mode of travel in London. At the same time, it became less appealing to travel by car as fuel prices and insurance costs rose, congestion increased and parking became more constrained. In central London, the introduction of the Congestion Charge in 2003 reduced traffic by 15 per cent overnight.
Wider societal factors, not all of them positive or desirable, had the effect of making it more likely people would travel by sustainable modes. A disproportionate amount of the population growth took place in denser inner London, and amongst younger working-age adults, particularly non-UK born Londoners, who are less likely to use the car. Amongst the youngest group, license holding fell considerably so that today’s young adults drive less than their predecessors. And although at an aggregate level the London economy was growing, incomes in outer London, where most of the car travel happens, remained stagnant from the early 2000s. In total, nearly all of the factors that influence the patterns of travel demand contributed to the rise of sustainable travel; in future, changes in any of these trends could make it more difficult to continue to reduce car use and help Londoners travel sustainably.
In future, travel patterns will be influenced by what we do, but also by factors outside our control. There is emerging evidence that car traffic is increasing, suggesting the balance of factors influencing demand may be changing. London is bigger than it has ever been and growing rapidly with the population expected to reach 10.5m by 2041, accompanied by 6.8 million jobs.
This is equivalent to adding two double decker buses full of new residents every day. The shape of the capital is changing, with more older people - the population over 70 is growing between two and three times as fast as average - and 1.8 million people with accessibility needs will be living in London by 2041. Employment is also expected to grow, with more than a million additional jobs by 2041, concentrated in central London.
Inevitably, growth on this scale will place significant pressure on the transport network. Total travel will increase by 23 per cent, with 5 million more trips per day by 2041 than today. Analysis has been undertaken to understand how people might travel in future, based upon current trends and the existing investment programme, which includes the opening of Crossrail 1 – the Elizabeth line – and the funded London Underground upgrade programme, as well as HS2 and the delivery of the HLOS and Thameslink upgrade programmes on national rail, but excludes unfunded major projects such as Crossrail 2. This analysis suggests that mode shift from the car will continue, albeit more slowly, with the car mode share falling from 36 per cent to 30 per cent by 2041 based on the current programme. Despite the falling car mode share, traffic will continue to rise if left unchecked. 3 The health challenge
Transport plays a vital role in improving health, and particularly in helping people to be physically active – most Londoners do not do enough activity to be healthy and travelling actively is the best way to achieve this. Streets make up 80 per cent of London’s public space so improving the street environment can dramatically improve quality of life in the city. This section describes the health challenge facing London and introduces the Healthy Streets approach.
The health challenge: key findings
- The life expectancy of Londoners has been increasing but adults are living more of their lives in poor health. Adults need at least 150 minutes and children 420 minutes of physical activity a week to stay healthy and reduce their risk of common, preventable diseases.
- At present, most Londoners do not do enough activity to be healthy and travelling actively is the best way to achieve this.
- Currently, a third of Londoners achieve their recommended level of physical activity from active travel alone. This has remained stable for the past seven years.
- If all Londoners walked or cycled for 20 minutes a day, this would save £1.7bn in NHS treatment costs over 25 years.
- Healthy Streets are safe, inclusive and encourage activity but London’s streets fall short of expectations. TfL and the GLA have identified ten Healthy Streets Indicators necessary to create a safe, inclusive space where people will choose to walk and cycle.
- Currently, London’s streets fall short of the expectations of those using them and this could worsen as the city gets busier. 3.1 The health challenge
Transport plays a vital role in improving health, and particularly in helping people to be physically active. A variety of factors mean that London’s population is gradually becoming or likely to become older, fatter, sicker and less mobile. The life expectancy of Londoners has been increasing but adults are living more of their lives in poor health. Six in ten adults and four in ten children (measured at age 11) are overweight or obese.
Under the GLA Act 2000, TfL has a responsibility to consider the impact of its policies on health and health inequalities and a new EU directive provides an additional requirement for TfL to specifically assess impacts on population and human health. In 2012, the Health and Social Care Act transferred responsibility for public health from the NHS to local government meaning that local authorities now have a statutory responsibility to use their powers and resources across all sectors to improve the health of their population. TfL has a significant role in supporting and enabling London boroughs to meet their statutory public health responsibilities.
The challenges that the Healthy Streets approach addresses are set out in the TfL report ‘Improving the health of Londoners - Transport Action Plan’.
Adults need at least 150 minutes and children 420 minutes of physical activity a week to stay healthy and reduce their risk of common, preventable diseases. Walking or cycling is one of the best ways to stay active and healthy as it provides regular physical activity integrated into people’s daily routines, particularly for groups who may struggle with more vigorous activity, but can manage to walk a journey.
At present, a third of Londoners achieve their recommended level of physical activity through active travel alone (as shown in Figure 19), with younger adults and non-car owners more likely to do so than older adults. If someone reports that they did two periods of ten minutes of active travel on the previous day through the London Travel Demand Survey we can be confident that they are sufficiently active. Currently, 34 per cent of Londoners report having done two periods of ten minutes of active travel on the previous day. This has remained constant over the last seven years. As well as making end-to-end journeys on foot or by bike, London residents can be more active by using public transport instead of the car. Travelling by public transport typically involves significantly more physical activity than travelling by car, due to the need to walk to and from the station or stop – most public transport trips include two or more walk ‘stages’ to complete the journey. As a result, recent research found that walk, cycle and public transport commuters had a lower BMI than those who commuted by car. Figure 20 shows the amount of time spent active as part of an average journey by mode.
If all Londoners walked or cycled for 20 minutes a day, this would save £1.75bn in NHS treatment costs over 25 years. In total, over two million more adults in London need to travel actively than do so today in order to deliver these health benefits. 60 per cent of those who need to be more active are under 50 years old. 3.2 Healthy Streets
The biggest benefits of transport on health in London are enabling people to interact with other people and be physically active as part of their daily routine. The biggest health harms of transport in London are road danger, noise and air pollution. The ten Healthy Streets Indicators are the essential ingredients required to address these health priorities, shown in Figure 21. Street environments which are safe and inclusive spaces in which everyone chooses to walk, cycle, access public transport and spend time improve health, reduce inequalities and make the city a better place to live, work and visit. Figure 22 outlines how the ten Healthy Streets indicators influence wellbeing, health inequalities and active travel.
Figure 21 Ten Healthy Street Indicators
Source: Mayor’s Transport Strategy – Draft for Consultation (2017) | Indicator | Influence on health and wellbeing | Influence on health inequalities | Influence on active travel | |-----------|----------------------------------|---------------------------------|---------------------------| | People choose to walk, cycle and use public transport | Active travel enables Londoners to achieve the recommended physical activity levels to stay healthy. | Car owners, older people and children are less likely to travel actively enough to get the activity they need to stay healthy. | Active travel is cheap, accessible and sustainable. People are more likely to walk and cycle when they see others doing so. | | Pedestrians from all walks of life | Walking can provide opportunities for social interaction. People with weak social and community ties have worse health outcomes. | Environments that aren’t inclusive to all create inequalities in activity levels and social interaction. | Environments that are safe and inviting for journeys made on foot or by bike will encourage people to be active. | | Easy to cross | Physical barriers or heavy traffic can make streets difficult to cross. This can disrupt social networks and lead to social isolation. | Severance is more likely to affect people living in deprived areas, disabled people and their carers, children and older people. | People prefer direct routes. Streets with fewer crossings and more, faster traffic are associated with less active travel. | | Not too noisy | Noise pollution influences sleep, stress, anxiety, blood pressure and mental health and affects memory and concentration. | Socially disadvantaged people are more likely to live in noisy environments near busy roads. | It is more pleasant to walk or cycle where noise levels are low. People avoid noisy streets for walking or social use. | | Clean air | Exposure to small particles causes cancers, cardiovascular and respiratory disease and contributes to premature deaths. | Most affects those who live, learn or work near busy roads; or are more vulnerable because of their age or existing medical conditions. | People with respiratory conditions must stay indoors and limit activity when pollution is high. | | Shade and shelter | Shade helps to protect people from sun damage. Heat can trigger exhaustion, confusion and heart attacks. | Older people are particularly vulnerable to excess heat, as are people with heart, respiratory and other serious health problems. | Temperature and rain influence active travel rates therefore shade and shelter can encourage active travel. | | People feel safe | Fear of injury and antisocial behaviour can be stressful and prevent people from walking and cycling. | Women, older people, and residents of deprived areas are more likely to feel unsafe. | Cyclist and pedestrians make up over half of all casualties on London’s streets. Safety concerns limit active travel. | | Things to see and do | People are more likely to travel actively when there are things to do locally. Long distances to everyday services increases isolation. | People who live in low density, car oriented environments travel less actively and tend to spend more on travel. | People prefer to be physically active in places they find appealing, with local destinations to go to and things to do. | | People feel relaxed | The physical environment, noise and air pollution, and safety concerns all contribute to stress. | Busy roads are intimidating and stressful to pedestrians, particularly children, disabled and older people. | People are more likely to walk or cycle in areas where they feel relaxed and which have pleasant and scenic elements. | | Places to stop and rest | Lack of resting places can influence and limit mobility for certain groups of people, leading to loneliness and social isolation. | Older people, people with injuries and mobility impairments and those accompanying young children, all rely on places to stop and rest. | People are more willing to visit, spend time in, or meet other people in areas where there are places to stop and rest. | Of course, not all streets are the same. Streets have different layouts and vary in terms of the type and volume of traffic they carry and why people go there. The challenge is to balance the many different demands of London’s streets, reflecting both their movement and place functions. Based on the idea that streets serve movement and place functions to differing degrees, nine ‘street types’ have been identified, shown in Figure 23 below.
**Figure 23 Classification of streets by function**
Source: The Vision for London’s Streets and Roads (Roads Task Force, 2013)
Research has explored how the different street types were performing from the perspective of people walking - do people’s perceptions of the street environment change depending on what type of street they are on? How do their expectations compare with their experience? This research found that London’s streets consistently perform below expectations across all measures, as shown in Figure 24. The survey was conducted on 80 streets in central, inner and outer London, representing all of the Street Types as defined by Street Types for London.
Respondents were asked to score 8 of the 10 Healthy Streets Indicators from 0 to 10 (10 is best) in terms of their expectation and experience. The two top level indicators (Pedestrians from all walk of life & People choose to walk and cycle) cannot be assessed by this methodology and so the assessment was based on pedestrian counts and mode share data.
The research found significant differences between expectations and experiences for all streets. On average, pedestrians expected a better environment on streets that were considered to have a high ‘place’ function and lower ‘movement’ function. (respondents were not told the TfL categorisation of the street), suggesting that people adapt their expectations to the situation and that the street types have real world relevance to Londoners. The results by street type are shown in Figure 25.
**Figure 24** Performance of streets against the Healthy Streets Indicators
Source: Travel in London report 7 (TfL 2014)
**Figure 25** Average Healthy Streets Scores and Street Types
Source: City Planning 3.3 Summary: the health challenge
The life expectancy of Londoners has been increasing but adults are living more of their lives in poor health. Most Londoners do not do enough activity to be healthy and travelling actively is the best way to achieve this.
Transport plays a vital role in improving health, and particularly in helping people to be physically active – adults need at least 150 minutes and children 420 minutes of physical activity a week to stay healthy and reduce their risk of common, preventable diseases.
Walking or cycling is one of the best ways to stay active and healthy as it provides regular physical activity integrated into people’s daily routines, particularly for groups who may struggle with more vigorous activity, but can manage to walk a journey. Currently, a third of Londoners achieve their recommended level of physical activity from active travel alone. If everyone in London walked or cycled for 20 minutes each day - including travel to and from public transport stations and stops - this could save £1.7bn in NHS treatment costs over 25 years.
Healthy Streets are safe, inclusive and encourage activity but London’s streets fall short of expectations.
Streets make up 80 per cent of London’s public space so improving the street environment can dramatically improve quality of life in the city. TfL and the GLA have identified ten indicators of a Healthy Street necessary to create a safe, inclusive space where people will choose to walk and cycle and spend time. Research shows that London’s streets fall short of the expectations of those using them. As the city gets busier, the street experience could worsen. 4 Healthy Streets and healthy people
In response to the call to action presented by the health challenge, this section describes the wide ranging challenges in delivering Healthy Streets and healthy people, including improving the street environment and helping people travel more actively, reducing road danger, tackling traffic and congestion and, at the heart of delivering each of these challenges, achieving mode shift from the car to more sustainable modes of transport.
Healthy Streets and healthy people: key findings
- Walking accounts for 30 per cent of all trips made by Londoners. As mode shift continues from car to public transport, more walk travel will be generated, with 38 million walk journey stages on an average day by 2041. There is considerable potential for people to walk more, with 3.6 million journeys made by motorised modes every day that could be walked all or part of the way. Over 60 per cent of these are in outer London.
- Cycling is now a major transport mode in London, with 670 thousand cycle journeys made each day. There is enormous potential to grow cycling further - 8.2 million trips are currently made by a motorised mode that could feasibly be cycled, with a further 1.6 million that could be cycled part of the way. Realising this potential means convincing non-cyclists that cycling is a safe and convenient option and investing in infrastructure to support this.
- The number of people killed or seriously injured on London’s roads in 2016 was the lowest on record. However, the proportion of KSIs made up of vulnerable road users has risen and more than 2,000 people were killed or seriously injured on London’s roads in 2015.
- Reducing transport crime and further improving confidence to travel will be challenging in the context of global insecurity, the threat of terrorist attacks on the road and transport system, financial constraints, a growing population and the impact of overcrowding on passenger behaviour, along with the changing risk and nature of crime.
- Congestion causes stress and frustration, delays bus passengers and imposes costs on businesses. As traffic volumes rise - particularly due to increasing van travel - and network capacity falls, congestion is expected to rise so that by 2041 the average Londoner will lose two and half days a year in traffic. In central London, congestion has returned to levels not seen since the introduction of the Congestion Charge in 2003.
- Freight activity in London has been increasing, with a 20 per cent increase in LGV vehicle kilometres by 2014, compared with 1994-1999. This growth is expected to continue, especially considering trends in ecommerce, an increase in just-in-time deliveries, and lengthening supply chains.
- Car ownership is linked to inactivity – 70 per cent of people without a car do some active travel in a day, compared to 40-50 per cent with a car. There is potential to deliver substantial mode shift from the car across London, but this would require changing the relative appeal of the car compared to other modes in terms of cost, convenience and attractiveness. 4.1 Walking
Walking is a near universal mode of transport, with very few Londoners saying that they never walk to make a trip. Younger people are more likely to walk than middle aged and older people, and the average distance walked per journey reduces with age. Women walk more than men, and inner London residents walk more than outer Londoners (shown in Figure 26), with residents of central London boroughs walking the most of all. Walking is the most commonly used mode of travel for trips to the shops, and for trips to and from school.
Figure 26 Amount of time spent walking on an average day, by borough of residence, London residents 2013/14
Walking accounts for 30 per cent of all trips made by Londoners and two thirds of trips under a mile. Furthermore, people walk as part of trips made by other modes. There are more than four times as many walk stages as walk trips made by Londoners every day – 30 million walk stages, including 13 million longer than five minutes. People walk further to access rail modes than to catch a bus, whilst most car trips involve very little walking at all.
Over the past decade, the proportion of trips made on foot has stayed the same but walking as part of a trip by another mode has increased at a faster rate, reflecting mode shift from car to public transport. This trend is likely to continue in future. The reference case forecast, if no further action is taken, is that eight million walk-all-the-way trips and 38 million walk journey ‘stages’ will be made on average day in 2041. The experience of walking in London
Most Londoners are highly positive about walking, considering it enjoyable, interesting and a good way to get fit (around 90 per cent of respondents to TfL’s Attitudes to Walking survey agreed with each statement in 2016). Three quarters believe that London is “a city for walking”. But Londoners also tell us that traffic fumes and heavy traffic make people dislike walking in London (66 and 57 per cent respectively).
The demand for high quality streets and public spaces that support physical, social and economic activity will increase as London’s population grows and changes. However, at the same time, the competition for time and space, including space to ‘dwell’, will intensify as the population and economy grow. Many streets in Central and Inner London already suffer from pedestrian overcrowding and low levels of pedestrian comfort. Particular challenges arise at major rail termini and on busy high streets on the strategic road network, where the needs of pedestrians conflict with the movement requirements of other modes. Figure 27 shows where pedestrian activity is most dense – with high pedestrian densities found in central London and town centres across the city.
Figure 27 Density of pedestrian activity in London The potential for people to walk more
In total, there are 3.6 million journeys made every day by a motorised mode that could be walked all or part of the way. These trips are mostly made by car or bus, and most take place in outer London (62 per cent). Figure 28 shows trips that could feasibly be walked, by the current mode of travel used. Characteristics of potentially walkable trips are:
- More than half of all potentially walkable trips are for shopping and leisure purposes.
- There are nearly a million journeys that would take less than 10 minutes for most people to walk – most of which are made by car.
- There is potential for more walking at all times of day, with the greatest number of potentially walkable trips occurring between 8am and 9am and 3pm and 4pm (in line with the profile of existing walk trips)
- The potential for walking is greater among women. Around 1.4 million potentially walkable trips (58 per cent) are currently made by women, compared to just over one million walkable trips for men. This difference is most pronounced for those aged 25-54. By mode, potentially walkable trips made by men are slightly more likely to be car driver trips, with women more likely to be travelling by bus or as a car passenger
- All groups could be walking more. The profile of both potentially walkable trips and overall Londoners’ travel is broadly similar with regard to ethnicity, age, household income and disability
Figure 28 Trips that could feasibly be walked all the way, by current mode of travel, London residents 2012/13 – 2014/15
| Mode | Trips | |------|-------| | Car | 1.6m | | Bus | 0.7m | | Tube | \<0.1m | | Rail | \<0.1m | | Taxi | \<0.1m | | P2W | \<0.1m |
Source: Analysis of Walking Potential (TfL 2017) In contrast, journeys where part (but not all) of the trip could be walked are more likely to be in central or inner London (61 per cent) and more likely to be made by public transport. Figure 29 shows trips that could feasibly be walked part of the way, by the mode currently being used instead and by the main mode of the trip.
A comparison of the demographic profile of potentially walkable trips and potentially walkable stages shows notable differences:
- Trips that could potentially be walked part of the way are more geographically concentrated, with 67 per cent to or from one of London’s town centres, compared to just 30 per cent of trips that could be walked all the way.
- While trips that could be walked all the way are more likely to be made by women, trips that could be walked part of the way are more likely to be made by men.
- People aged 17-44 are more likely to be making trips that could be walked part of the way – around 65 per cent of the total, compared to only 40 per cent of walkable trips.
- People in higher income households are more likely to make trips that could be walked part of the way.
- Trips that could be walked part of the way are more prevalent at peak times (8-9am and 4-7pm).
**Figure 29** Journeys that could feasibly be walked part of the way, by current mode of travel used for walkable journey stage and main mode of the trip, London residents 2012/13 – 2014/15
| Mode of walkable stage | Main mode of trip | Number of walkable stages | |------------------------|-------------------|---------------------------| | | | 330,000 | | | | 250,000 | | | | 230,000 | | | | 160,000 | | | | 100,000 | | | | 40,000 |
Source: Analysis of Walking Potential (TfL 2017) Analysis was conducted by Dr Ashley Dhanani at University College London of London’s street network to assess how walkable the network is. Walkability is a technical measure that takes into account the availability of the network and the density of origins and destinations – the measures included are shown in Figure 30. It does not tell us how much walking is currently taking place in that location, or how pleasant it is to walk there.
**Figure 30 Measures of walkability**
Source: TfL Walking team and Dr Ashley Dhanani
Combining walkability data with trips that could potentially be walked identifies suitable locations to focus the effort to increase walking, shown in yellow in Figure 31. These are the quick wins – places where the improvements required will be at the street rather than the network level, and are often in town centres. One of the challenges is that growing walking will require structural changes too – delivered through planning, regeneration and expansion of the public transport network.
**Figure 31 Walkability of London’s street network combined with trips that could potentially be walked but aren’t at present, by origin**
Source: TfL Analysis of Walking Potential (2017) TfL’s Attitudes to Walking Survey revealed that many Londoners are open to changing their travel behaviour. A third of those who don’t currently walk short distance would consider walking the school run or when grocery shopping (see Figure 32).
**Figure 32** Proportion of Londoners who would be likely to consider walking, by type of journey, 2007 - 2016
Source: Attitudes to Walking Survey (TfL 2016)
However, we know that whilst over time around a third of London residents have consistently said that they would be willing to consider walking more, the share of trips made on foot has remained highly stable over a very long period of time. This is partly because of the natural ‘churn’ in travel behaviour – so that a stable headline figure can be made up of masses of people changing their behaviour, with some walking more and others walking less. But it is also because it is difficult to translate good intentions into sustained change and some Londoners, particularly regular car drivers are resistant to walking – three in ten say they do not see why they should consider walking journeys that take more than 15 minutes on foot. Two thirds of trips that could feasibly be walked but aren’t at present are made by people less likely than average to increase their walk travel. London residents tell us that the main barriers to walking are convenience, time, distance, the need to carry things, and having other, more practical ways of travelling.
Together, these findings suggest that people could be encouraged to walk more by an improved walking environment, and by better information about walking routes, distances and times. People are often unaware of the route or likely time it would take to walk a familiar journey they make by another mode. When people choose how to travel, they take into account the relative cost, time and convenience of the alternatives available to them. Improving the appeal of walking, by providing a safer and more pleasant environment will encourage people to walk. Nevertheless, they will continue to be deterred from walking if the alternatives are (or are perceived to be) more convenient, cheap and quick. Every day, many journeys are driven that could easily be walked. Whilst the car remains a cheap and convenient mode of travel, we can expect this to continue: encouraging people to be more active means discouraging them to travel by car. 4.2 Cycling
Cycling is now a major mode of transport in London, with 670,000 journeys made each day by bike in 2015 equating to 10 per cent of bus passenger journeys, almost a fifth of Tube passenger journeys or 100 per cent of all journeys on the District Line. This is the result of sustained investment by TfL working jointly with the London boroughs to create cycle route networks, improve access to cycles, and provide cycle parking facilities and training for cyclists, as well as a wide range of initiatives to make cycling safer.
In particular, there has been substantial growth in the number of people choosing to cycle in order to access Central London, with flows across the cordon surrounding central London increasing by more than 200 per cent since 2001. Cycle trips made by London residents in inner London have risen by 133 per cent since 2005/06 (based on trip origin). Cycling has grown the least in outer London, but the region has the most potential for growth in terms of trip volumes - only 6 per cent of trips that could be cycled are currently cycled. Figure 33 shows current cycle flows by route in the morning peak hour, showing the extent to which cycling is concentrated in central and inner London and in the south west of London.
Figure 33 Cycle flows, morning peak hour, 2014
Source: City Planning The experience of cycling in London
Cycling is an efficient way to travel in London. Figure 34 compares the travel time by cycle and public transport to central London. This shows that more than half the working age population in London would find it quicker to cycle than travel by public transport. This is recognised by Londoners – 83 per cent say that cycling is a convenient way to get around.
Figure 34 Comparison of journey times by cycle and public transport
People enjoy cycling and cite multiple benefits of cycling. 77 per cent of Londoners believe that cycling is enjoyable and people continue to cycle in London because it is fun, quick, convenient, cheap and a good way to keep fit.
However, London cyclists often feel that the experience of cycling could and should be better. Just 54 per cent of people who cycle regularly said they were satisfied with their journey experience on London’s streets in 2016. These people were particularly concerned about the impact of heavy traffic and congestion on their journey, and by the lack of consideration shown to them by other road users. In particular, TfL’s Attitudes to Cycling Survey in Autumn 2016 found that 15 per cent of people who cycle regularly in London feel unsafe cycling on quiet roads and 62 per cent feel unsafe cycling on busy roads – rising to 82 per cent of those who only cycle occasionally. One in six cyclists did not feel safe from crime and antisocial behaviour whilst cycling in London in the daytime, rising to 45 per cent at night. More than one in ten had experienced bike theft in the past two years. The potential for people to cycle more
There remains enormous potential to grow cycling further to 2041. New analysis suggests that 8.2 million trips currently made by a motorised mode could feasibly be cycled all the way, and a further 1.6 million trips could be cycled part of the way. More than half of trips that could be cycled all the way are currently made by car (shown in Figure 35) whilst the parts of journeys that could feasibly be cycled are mostly made by public transport (shown in Figure 36). Characteristics of trips that could potentially be cycled are:
- Almost half of all potentially cyclable trips are made for shopping and leisure purposes, one in six made for each of commuting and education.
- 6.5 million trips currently made by a motorised mode would take less than 20 minutes for most people to cycle.
- There is considerable overlap between trips that could feasibly be walked or cycled: 2.4 million trips could feasibly be made by either mode.
- The potential for cycling is greater among women. Just over 4.5 million potentially cyclable trips (55 per cent) are made by women, compared to just over 3.6 million cyclable trips for men. This difference is most pronounced among those aged 25-54.
There is the potential to grow cycling across London. Just over one in ten potentially cyclable trips was made within or to/from central London. Around a quarter of the potential is within inner London, 64 per cent within outer London or travelling between inner and outer London. Town centres offer a particular opportunity for growth, with 33 per cent of potentially cyclable trips involving travel to or from one of London’s town centres.
Figure 35 Trips that could feasibly be cycled all the way, by current mode of travel, London residents 2012/13 – 2014/15
| Mode | Number | |-------|--------| | Car | 4.7m | | Bus | 2.3m | | Tube | 0.7m | | Rail | 0.2m | | Taxi | 0.1m | | P2W | \<0.1m |
Source: Analysis of Cycling Potential (TfL 2017) Figure 36 Journeys that could feasibly be cycled part of the way, by current mode of travel used for cyclable journey stage and main mode of the trip, London residents 2012/13 – 2014/15
| Mode of cyclable stage | Main mode of trip | Number of cyclable stages | |------------------------|-------------------|---------------------------| | | | 330,000 | | | | 250,000 | | | | 230,000 | | | | 160,000 | | | | 100,000 | | | | 40,000 |
Source: Analysis of Cycling Potential (TfL 2017)
TfL’s Transport Classification of Londoners classifies London households into nine segments based on their characteristics, preferences and travel habits. Figure 37 describes these segments and shows how their propensity to cycle varies considerably. It also shows the number of trips currently made by another mode that could feasibly be cycled made by each group. This highlights both the opportunity and the challenge: 43 per cent of potentially cyclable trips are made by the four segments with the greatest propensity to increase cycling, 20 per cent by the two groups with around average propensity to increase cycling, and 37 per cent by those in segments much less likely than average to choose to cycle. The groups who will be the most difficult to persuade to take up cycling typically live in outer London and use the car as their main mode of travel.
### Figure 37 Segmentation of Londoners by propensity to cycle and cycling potential
| Segment | Description | Propensity to increase cycling (100=average) | Potentially cyclable trips | |--------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------|---------------------------| | Affordable transitions | Often experiencing life transitions such as starting a first job or a new family and consequently exhibit the most change. Low car use, high PT use, average amount of walking and more likely than average to cycle. | 164 | 458,600 | 6% | | Urban mobility | Typically young working adults with no children and good incomes living in inner London. Low car use and high levels of cycle use. High bus use, average amount of walking and Underground use. | 142 | 879,900 | 11% | | Suburban moderation | Living in outer London with at least one child at home. Car use is high, with use of public transport and active modes below average but with a higher than average tendency to change. | 138 | 1,689,500 | 21% | | Educational advantage | Mainly living in central London, highly educated with above average incomes and without children. Rely on public transport and walking. | 113 | 422,700 | 5% | | Students & graduates | Based mainly in inner London, students and recent graduates on average incomes. Car use low so rely on public transport and active modes for travel, particularly bus and walk. | 106 | 1,026,400 | 13% | | City living | Mainly living in central London. Rely on the tube and active modes, and are no more than averagely likely to change. | 102 | 585,000 | 7% | | Detached retirement | Typically retired or "empty nesters" living in the greener suburbs on the fringes of London, their lives are 'settled' and they don't make many changes. Travel is dominated by the car. | 55 | 1,833,100 | 22% | | Family challenge | Typically young families; finances are tough for this segment and they are less likely than average to make changes. Use of car and active modes is around average, while bus use is well above average. | 55 | 545,500 | 6% | | Settled suburbia | Living across outer London with at least one child at home and on lower incomes. Car use is high and use of active modes and public transport particularly low. Low likelihood of change. | 42 | 725,000 | 9% |
Source: City Planning TfL’s Cynemon tool estimates the demand for cycling at a strategic level across London. It draws together all the analysis described above into a single estimation tool, derived from the analysis of potentially cyclable trips, propensity to cycle based on the Transport Classification of London segmentation, and current cycle journey patterns. Figure 38 shows the estimate distribution of cycle trips in 2026 as suggested by the model. It shows that the most intense increase will be in the centre of London, but with significant growth in the east of London as well.
**Figure 38 Estimate of future cycle trips by location, 2026**
Source: City Planning
**Challenges in encouraging people to cycle more**
Most Londoners can ride a bike (80 per cent), although some may not have done so since they were a child, and more than half have access to a bike they can use. However, 44 per cent say that cycling is “not for people like me”. Many recognise the benefits of cycling, but are put off by concerns about safety, traffic and lack of confidence – perception of safety is the number one deterrent for 75 per cent of those thinking about taking up cycling. Children are often enthusiastic about cycling and are keen to cycle to school and at the weekends, whereas their parents may be more cautious, citing concerns about safety as well as issues around practicality such as trips being too far. Realising the potential for growth in cycle travel will require a range of barriers particular to each region of London to be overcome, as shown in Figure 39.
### Figure 39 Barriers to cycling
| Barrier | Description | |----------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Fear and vulnerability | Concerns about safety from collisions and the volume of traffic, as well as concerns about personal safety whilst cycling or the risk of bike theft. | | Lack of infrastructure | Lack of dedicated cycle routes and wayfinding, or inadequate routes, the poor condition of roads and the lack of cycle facilities particularly secure cycle parking at origins and destinations (including at home). | | Whether they identify with cycling and how attractive it is to them | Lack of identification with stereotypes about ‘who cycles’, and not knowing anyone who cycles in their social network or local community. May not consider cycling an attractive option. | | How cycling compares to the alternatives | Cycling is not always seen as compatible with busy lifestyles or with the need to look smart. Bad weather and fears of bike breakdowns put people off cycling, and other modes may simply be considered more convenient. | | Lack of confidence | Lacking confidence in ability to ride a bike, knowing the rules or etiquette of cycling, not knowing what equipment is needed or what route to take. | | The physical effort of cycling | Concern that you need to be fitter to cycle, compounded by a lack of awareness of how long it will take to cycle a journey and lack of awareness of different bike and route options. | | Access to a cycle | The cost or availability of a cycle is a barrier to cycling. |
Source: TfL Surface Transport
Many people use cycles as mobility aids, and many people with mobility impairments would consider cycling if street environments allowed them to do so in safety and comfort. Providing appropriate cycle infrastructure, or improving streets in general by allowing for all types of cycle to be used with comfort, can therefore play an important role in ensuring that TfL meets the commitments set out in its Single Equality Scheme through taking a Healthy Streets approach.
There is considerable potential to grow cycling – many journeys could be cycled in under 20 minutes, and for many journeys cycling would be quicker than the current mode of travel used. Cycling is cheap, efficient and reliable, and most people agree that cycling can be a pleasant way to get about. People that don’t currently cycle in London can be concerned about safety and worried that cycling may not be a convenient option for them – to help them start cycling means overcoming the practical and attitudinal barriers. More high quality, safe and pleasant routes, supported by plentiful and secure parking, will be required to change people’s minds. 4.3 Reducing road danger
While London has a long and successful history in reducing casualties, adopting Vision Zero for London would represent a step change in the approach to reducing road casualties. Adopting Vision Zero for London would mean a long term vision to reduce road danger so that no deaths or serious injuries occur on London’s roads.
The reduction of road danger is also essential to delivering mode shift from the car, as people will only choose to walk or cycle if they feel safe doing so. The fear of cycling is a barrier for many non-cyclists to start cycling and a safer network will encourage more cycling.
Reducing the dominance of motor vehicles is key to this approach, specifically on routes and locations where the numbers of vulnerable road users are greatest and continue to grow. The general characteristic of the road network makes this a highly complex task due to the widely open nature of the system, with interactions between all travel modes, and many instances of conflict.
The number of people killed or seriously injured (KSI) on London’s roads is the lowest on record but still stands at more than 2,000 per year. In 2015, 2,092 people were injured in KSI collisions on London’s roads. This is 42 per cent below the 2005-09 baseline. The previous road safety target was met six years early and London is on track to achieve the target established in 2015 of a 50 per cent reduction in KSIs by 2020 (shown in Figure 40).
Current forecasts show that if progress continued at a similar rate, KSIs would continue to fall to around 1,000 by 2040.
Figure 40 Progress towards reducing the numbers of people killed or seriously injured by 2020
Source: TfL Road Safety team Pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists are most at risk of being involved in a collision. In recent years, the greatest reductions in KSIs have been amongst car occupants. As a result, the proportion of KSIs made up of vulnerable road users has risen as overall KSIs have fallen. Figure 41 below illustrates.
Some groups are more vulnerable to road danger than others. Londoners from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic groups suffer a disproportionately high number of road casualties. Pedestrians in the most deprived areas are more than twice as likely to be injured as those in the least deprived areas. Between 2005 - 2009 and 2015, there were 55 per cent fewer children killed or seriously injured. Over this period child pedestrian KSIs reduced by 52 per cent and child car occupants by 72 per cent showing that more needs to be done to increase child pedestrian safety.
**Figure 41 Number of people killed and seriously injured by road user type, 2000 to 2015**
Source: TfL Road Safety team
Buses are an efficient way of travelling – they take up 11 per cent of road space but make up almost 60 per cent of distance travelled by people on central London roads. However, in the last three years there were on average 200 people killed or seriously injured in collisions involving buses or coaches. Furthermore, buses and coaches are disproportionately involved in collisions with pedestrians and cyclists, relative to their traffic mode share. For example a pedestrian is seven times more likely to be killed in a collision with a bus and five times more likely to be seriously injured in a collision with a bus than would be expected, given buses’ share of traffic
Recent trials of Intelligent Speed Assistance on buses, additional segregated cycle routes, average speed cameras, engineering schemes, educational initiatives and 20mph limits have all reduced danger and increased safety. There are now 20mph speed limits and zones on 28 per cent of London’s roads. Overall, including slight casualties, there were 30,182 injuries from road collisions in 2015 showing the scale of the challenge of reducing road danger in London and improving safety. 4.4 Personal safety and security
The safety and security of transport and travelling in London remains a priority for the Mayor. The recent terror attacks in London and Manchester have highlighted the importance of ongoing efforts to reduce the likelihood and impact of these terrible incidents on London’s roads and public transport networks and to improve safety and security of transport and travelling.
Reducing transport crime and further improving confidence to travel will be challenging in the context of global insecurity and the growth in hatred and intolerance and extremism; the threat of terrorist attacks on the road and transport system; financial constraints; a growing population and the impact of overcrowding on passenger behaviour; along with the changing risk and nature of crime. These challenges are increasing demands for policing and enforcement resources, as well as other important crime reduction and operational security measures.
In terms of crime levels on TfL’s public transport network, crime fell by over 50 per cent between 2005/6 and 2016/17 – equivalent to almost 30,000 offences. While over the long term, crime has been falling on the public transport network, levels of crime on the system have seen small increases since 2014/15. The rate of crime in 2016/17 was 7.5 crimes per million passenger journeys, up from 7.0 in 2014/15 (which was the lowest rate on record). The increases in crime have largely been driven by an anticipated increase in reported sexual offences and an increase in low-level violence and public order offences. Trends in crime rates on the transport network are presented in Figure 42.
Figure 42 Reported crime on the public transport network, 2004/05 to 2016/17
Source: TfL Surface Transport Concerns about the risk of crime and disorder can act as a barrier to travel. Research commissioned by TfL shows that the majority of Londoners feel safe whilst using public transport. The 2016 annual report showed that 11 per cent of Londoners were very or quite worried about their personal security when using public transport in London and 18 per cent had recalled an incident in the last three months which made them feel worried about their personal safety. Women, black and minority ethnic and disabled Londoners are significantly more likely to be generally worried (very or quite) and have experienced a specific incident of worry in the last three months.
Maintaining the downward trend in crime levels and further improving confidence to travel will be challenging while dealing with financial constraint, a growing population, increasing demands for policing and enforcement resources, as well as changes in the nature of crime and antisocial behaviour affecting transport and travelling in London. 4.5 Traffic and congestion
Impact of congestion
15 per cent of the UK’s road congestion is concentrated in the Capital and the average Londoner loses two days a year to congestion. Congestion causes stress and frustration, and limits the amount people can travel because journeys are slow and unpredictable. For businesses, congestion costs businesses money as workers spend time queuing in traffic, it is difficult to make deliveries on time, and an unreliable road network harms the reputation of London as a good place to do business for investors. Bus users are also affected by congestion, as their journeys become slower and more unreliable. A recent study by INRIX and the Centre for Economics and Business Research suggested that London could incur costs of £9.3 billion from traffic congestion by 2030, an increase of 70 percent from today, costing each car commuting household more than £4,000 a year.
That being said, arguably, congestion is an inevitable by-product of a vibrant, successful city. Put simply, a network with no congestion is a network with no traffic – congestion exists because lots of people want to be in the same place at the same time, and the benefits they gain from this make it worthwhile for them to endure the conditions. The high levels of congestion experienced in central London reflect its status as the centre of the UK economy. Nevertheless, we need to find a way of delivering a functioning, reliable road network that has less of an impact of people’s quality of life, without limiting the amount of activity that can take place.
Current conditions on the road network
Congestion remained relatively stable for a period, but started to rise from 2014, with a particularly sharp rise seen in central London, already the region with the highest rate of congestion, as shown in Figure 43. For much of this period, traffic was stable or falling but in the most recent period, traffic has started to rise again, perhaps explaining the sharp spike in congestion. Figure 44 shows how this level of congestion manifests itself on the network – across the day, large parts of the strategic road network suffer delays of more than one minute per kilometre. Figure 43 Congestion by London region, morning peak, 2008 to 2016
Source: TfL Surface Transport
Figure 44 Congestion (minutes per kilometre of delay), weekday average, 2014/15
Source: TfL Surface Transport Around a quarter of the congestion experienced in London is caused by temporary incidents – accidents, roadworks, special events and so on (shown in Figure 45). Road network management strategies, technology and customer information can all be employed to minimise the impact of such incidents on road users. However, analysis has suggested that around three quarters of congestion in London is simply caused by there being more traffic than the network can handle, by demand exceeding supply in other words. Beyond the immediate stress and frustration, congestion is primarily experienced as something which limits the ability to travel and thus reduces the connectedness of the city. Given these two factors – that congestion is caused by excess demand, and that congestion limits effective connectivity – the best solution to the problem of congestion is to improve connectivity by other modes and reduce the demand on the road network.
**Figure 45 Estimated causes of congestion**
![Pie chart showing estimated causes of congestion]
Source: TfL Surface Transport
**Future conditions on the road network**
Despite a falling car mode share, without further action traffic is expected to rise across much of London, with the exception of central London (see Figure 46), with 8.6 million more kilometres travelled by road on an average day in 2041 compared to 2015.
Over the same period, the amount of space available for use by general road traffic is expected to reduce by 3 per cent, as shown in Figure 47. This reduction is particularly pronounced in central London. Figure 46 Change in traffic volumes by region, baseline without interventions proposed in MTS, 2015 to 2041
Source: City Planning
Figure 47 Forecast changes in road network capacity, baseline without interventions proposed in MTS, 2015 to 2041
Source: City Planning Notes: Red indicates reduced capacity, green increased capacity The cumulative impact of more traffic in a reduced network is that congestion is expected to rise steeply over the period to 2041, leading to slower traffic speeds and more time spent travelling, as shown in Figures 48 and 49. In total, speeds will fall by a quarter in central London throughout the day and by around a sixth across the rest of London in peak periods, with speeds in central London remaining at below 10km per hour all day. The effect of this is that by 2041, it will take more than an hour (64 minutes) to travel 10km by road in central London, 15 minutes longer than today. In inner London, the same journey would take 35 minutes, 4 minutes longer than today, and in outer London 21 minutes, 3 minutes longer than today. By 2041, the average Londoner will lose two and a half days to congestion per year.
**Figure 48** Forecast changes in traffic speeds by region, baseline without interventions proposed in MTS, 2015 to 2041
!\[Bar chart showing forecast changes in traffic speeds by region, baseline without interventions proposed in MTS, 2015 to 2041.\](source: City Planning) Figure 49 Forecast changes in distance travelled and time spent travelling by road, baseline without interventions proposed in MTS, 2015 to 2041
Source: City Planning
Congestion is most damaging where it affects journey times in places and for people and groups who are highly dependent on highway connectivity. Whilst congestion in terms of the rate of delay per kilometre travelled is worst in central London: 68 per cent of time lost to congestion occurs in outer London, 23 per cent in inner London and just 9 per cent in central London. This reflects the size of outer London but also its dependency on car as the main mode of travel. The amount of congestion experienced per capita has been calculated as a way of evaluating the possible impact of congestion. In central London, congestion has been calculated per job for the same purpose. These calculations show that, per resident, outer Londoners experience 48 hours of congestion per year, and this is expected to rise to 60 hours per person per year by 2041, a greater increase than is expected anywhere else in London, as shown in Figure 50. The greater dependency of outer London’s population and businesses on the road network may mean that congestion in outer London has a more significant economic impact than elsewhere, despite being ‘less congested’ on a minutes per kilometre basis. Figure 50 Delay experienced per job in central London and per resident in inner and outer London, actual and baseline forecast without interventions proposed in MTS, 2007 to 2041
Source: City Planning
Figures 51 and 52 show junctions operating at between 80 to 90 per cent capacity (marked in orange) and at over 90 per cent of capacity (marked in red). Junctions operating so close to capacity lack resilience and cause congestion. By 2041, the number of junctions operating at this level increases dramatically, from 750 in 2015 to 1150 in 2041 and traffic flows through those junctions also increase. By 2041, the junctions marked in Figure 52 are expected to account for 38 per cent of congestion, unless further action is taken. Figure 51 Junctions operating at over 80 per cent capacity, flow weighted, 2015
Source: City Planning
Figure 52 Junctions operating at over 80 per cent of capacity, weighted by flow, baseline forecast without MTS interventions, 2041
Source: City Planning Focus on congestion in central London
Central London is a special case on London’s road network, because it is subject to the Congestion Charging Scheme, which operates between 7am and 6pm, with drivers required to pay a charge of £11.50 per day to travel in the zone. The area covered by the Congestion Charge is shown in Figure 53.
Figure 53 Central London Congestion Charging Zone
A range of discounts and exemptions apply, most notably: blue badge holders, motorcycles, Ultra Low Emission vehicles (that qualify for the ULED discount) and vehicles with 9 or more seats are not required to pay the charge. Taxis and private hire vehicles are exempt from paying the Congestion Charge when actively licensed with London Taxi and Private Hire (TPH). The exemption for private hire vehicles only applies when undertaking private hire bookings. Residents of the zone are entitled to a 90 per cent discount on the charge.
The immediate impacts of the introduction of the Congestion Charging Scheme in 2004 were a 15 per cent reduction in circulating traffic and a 30 per cent reduction in congestion. However, a steady programme of improvements to conditions for buses, pedestrians and cyclists means that the capacity available for general traffic is now considerably lower than in 2004, and as a result, whilst traffic levels remain lower than in the pre-charging period, congestion is now reaching pre-charging levels. This reduction in speeds has been matched by deteriorating bus speeds, so that buses in central London now travel more slowly than in the pre-charging era. This decline in speeds is affecting passenger demand for bus services. Half of the vehicles in the zone during charging hours are subject to the full charge, four per cent to the residents discount and 46 per cent are exempt or entitled to an 100 per cent discount. Taxis and private hire vehicles are the largest group of discounted or exempt vehicles, accounting for 25 per cent of all unique vehicles seen in the zone. Taxis and private hire vehicles account for a higher proportion of traffic, with taxis accounting for 20 per cent of traffic and private hire vehicles for 13 per cent. There is evidence that the volume of private hire vehicles is rising fast throughout the day and week, with a rise of 54 per cent between 2013 and 2015 (shown in Figure 54), although the busiest periods for private hire vehicles remain late evenings/night and the volume of taxis remains considerably higher during the daytime.
**Figure 54** Taxi and private hire vehicle entries to the Congestion Charging Zone on an average Friday, 2013 to 2015
Freight accounts for 19 per cent of traffic in the charging zone (15 per cent light goods vehicles, 4 per cent heavy goods vehicles) but due to the size of the vehicles takes up a disproportionate amount of road space. Van traffic has been rising and this is expected to continue – freight trends are described in more detail in the section below. The volume of vans rises sharply from 6am, and then remains relatively flat between 7am and 3pm (shown in Figure 55). Heavy goods vehicle flows are highest through the morning, falling off from lunchtime. There is relatively little freight activity outside of charging hours. In particular, almost 30 per cent of all morning peak movements are freight, but only 17 per cent across the whole day. Only 15 per cent of freight trips are overnight. Outside of charging hours, traffic levels and congestion have risen such that traffic speeds at the busiest times on Saturdays and Sundays are barely higher than in the weekday morning peak: in 2014/15, average speeds were 8mph in the weekday morning peak, 8.4mph in the Saturday evening peak, and 8.9mph in the Sunday evening peak. At the weekend, the profile of traffic throughout the day looks very different, with low levels in the mornings and then rising steadily to peak at around 6pm. At the busiest times, traffic levels are similar to those seen on weekdays (see Figure 56). At the weekend, cars make up a much higher proportion of vehicles at around 70 per cent of all vehicles, with fewer freight vehicles in particular.
Furthermore, traffic levels on weekdays outside of charging hours have risen so that the busiest time of day is now the period immediately after charging finishes in the evening peak, as shown in Figure 57. 56 per cent of these vehicles are travelling in the evening period only, and have not been subject to the Congestion Charge. Congestion during charging hours is already at pre-charging levels and is forecast to rise significantly in future. In particular, the volume of private hire vehicles (not subject to the Congestion Charge) and vans is rising, and this is expected to continue. Only half of all vehicles in the Congestion Charging Zone are required to pay the full charge, and this proportion may fall given current trends. Outside of charging hours, traffic and congestion in the evenings and at weekends are as bad or worse than during charging hours, affecting central London's appeal as a shopping, leisure and entertainment destination. 4.6 Freight
London’s continued success critically relies on safe, reliable, sustainable and efficient goods delivery and servicing. Every Londoner, business or visitor is dependent on the goods and services that are delivered by road, rail, water and air transportation. As London grows, the demand for freight activity will grow accordingly but, as with all travel, we must ensure that this need is met in a way that minimises its negative impact on the rest of the city.
In 2010, 132 million tonnes of road freight were lifted (having an origin or destination within) in London, and 90 per cent of all freight is lifted by road. In 2013, Light Goods Vehicles (LGVs) accounted for 14 per cent and Heavy Goods Vehicles (HGVs) for 5 per cent of motorised vehicle kilometres in London. Not all travel using a freight vehicle is for business purposes – LGVs in particular are also used for personal travel and commuting and conversely, some freight activity is conducted in private cars – there is anecdotal evidence that this is becoming more common.
Freight activity has been increasing. By 2015, LGV vehicle kilometres were 20 per cent higher and HGV vehicle kilometres 4 per cent higher than the average for 1994-1999 (see Figures 58 and 59). This is expected to continue, with van traffic expected to grow by 26 per cent by 2041, whilst HGV traffic is likely to remain fairly stable.
Figure 58 HGV traffic, percentage change, 1994-99 - 2015
Source: TfL Surface Transport The growth in freight traffic has been driven by population and employment growth, but also by trends, most of which are expected to continue, such as:
- An increase in ecommerce, placing pressure on employment zones as people increasingly order personal goods for delivery to their workplaces.
- An increase in just-in-time delivery and roads becoming on-the-move warehouses.
- Freight/logistics pushed to peripheral out-of-town areas.
- Freight/logistics pulled to areas with good highway accessibility.
- Globalisation of supply, lengthening supply chains and the distance travelled.
It is estimated that freight adds around £7.5 billion to the GVA of London. 230,000 people were directly employed in the logistics sector in London in 2012, 5 per cent of the workforce, and many more jobs rely on freight movement. Nevertheless, whilst freight is an essential part of economic activity, not all freight movements are efficient or essential in the place and time that they are taking place. For example, AECOM’s report for the RAC Foundation found that 66 per cent of vans are less than half full.
HGV activity primarily supports construction – almost half of all HGV trips in the peak are for construction purposes, with municipal vehicles and food and drink the next largest categories. Vans serve a wider range of purposes, lifting goods but also being used for servicing. Figure 60 below shows that around one in eight vans is being used for private rather than work purposes whilst Figure 61 shows the journey purpose of vans surveyed in the morning peak period in central London.
**Figure 60 Summary journey purpose of van trips, 2008**
- Non-work purposes, 13%
- Going to or from goods/courier collection or delivery, 27%
- Other work or commuting reasons, 59%
Source: City Planning
**Figure 61 Journey purpose of van trips, central London, morning peak, 2016**
Source: TfL Surface Transport The challenges with regards to freight are:
- As London grows and densifies, ensuring a smarter use of space so that traffic does not grow at the same pace, including kerbside loading space.
- Anticipating and mitigating the risk that hauliers will respond to rising congestion by increasing the number of vehicles and staff. Solutions might include retiming freight activity so that only traffic that must be on the road in peak periods is on the roads, with other traffic spread out to less congested times of day. In the centre, this might also include encouraging the use of more sustainable modes for freight, such as cargo bikes.
- Minimising other impacts, including the visual intrusion and noise impacts of goods vehicles, the impact on infrastructure and perceptions of goods vehicles in town centres.
- Ensuring that the costs imposed by freight upon the network are reflected in the costs experienced by customers (businesses and households), in order to keep demand at a reasonable and necessary level.
Furthermore, challenges remain in ensuring that freight activity is safe and clean. Whilst freight does not disproportionately contribute to casualties overall, HGVs cause a disproportionate number of fatalities on London’s roads. LGVs and HGVs were responsible for 10 per cent and 13 per cent respectively of road transport CO₂ emissions in London in 2010.
A growing city will need more freight activity; transport policy therefore needs to ensure that necessary freight activity operates safe vehicles, in the right time and the right place; on a road network that delivers a predictable and timely travel experience. 4.7 Car ownership and use
At present, 57 per cent of London households own a car, so that there are 2.7 million cars registered in London, and 9.5 million trips are made by car on an average day. In future, we expect the trend of falling car use to continue, with the proportion of trips made by car expected to fall from 36 per cent to 30 per cent. However, a shift in the distribution of trips, with more, longer trips expected in outer London, means that kilometres travelled by car is expected to rise by around 8 per cent.
Car ownership and health
Car ownership is the strongest determinant of inactivity. 70 per cent of people without a car do some active travel in a day compared to 50 per cent with access to one car and 40 per cent with access to two or more cars. People living in multi-car households are half as likely as non-car owners to do enough activity through active travel for good health. Figure 62 shows a comparison of the extent to which different factors can predict the likelihood that a resident of outer London does 30 minutes of active travel. This clearly shows that not having a car is the best predictor of adults being active.
Figure 62 Predictors of achieving 30 minutes of active travel, odds ratio compared to reference category with 95 per cent confidence limits, outer London residents 2013/14
Source: Active travel in London: The role of travel survey data in describing population physical activity (Fairnie, Wilby & Saunders, Journal of Transport and Health 2016)
In London, children living in households without a car are more than twice as likely to walk to school (2.3 times) and nearly twice as likely to walk during the summer or at weekends (1.8 times) than those living in households with a car. While car ownership correlates with older age and living in outer London with poorer public transport access there are many younger adults who are using cars for trips that could reasonably be walked or cycled or done by public transport.
**Why we need to reduce car ownership and use**
Underlying the challenges of delivering Healthy Streets in London is a basic need to deliver population and jobs growth without a commensurate rise in car travel.
Space on London’s road network is highly constrained and private motorised traffic is a space inefficient way of moving people. Every day over 360,000 cars, Private Hire Vehicles (PHV) and taxis enter Central London, taking up 73 per cent of road space used for people movement but only carrying 22 per cent of the travel happening on the roads (in terms of person kilometres). In contrast, buses take up 16 per cent of road space used for people movement but account for 67 per cent of distance travelled by people on Central London roads. Figure 63 illustrates the relative use of road space and distance travelled in central London.
Similarly, initial findings into the road-space efficiency of the East-West and North-South Cycle Superhighways suggest that the new infrastructure carries on average 46 per cent of the traffic along the route at key locations, despite occupying only 30 per cent of the road-space. It is estimated that the East-West and North-South corridors are now able to carry 18 per cent more people per hour than they could without cycle lanes.
**Figure 63 Relative use of road space and distance travelled by road-based mode, central London, 2016**
Source: City Planning
**What is ‘essential car travel’?**
Since its invention, the car has provided welcome connectivity and opened up new opportunities for people. Even in a densely populated city such as London, some journeys can only reasonably be made by car. However, the amount of space that can or should be taken up by private road transport is limited, and the population is growing. As well as prioritising more space-efficient and sustainable modes (pedestrians, cycles and buses), there is a general consensus that the limited remaining space should be prioritised for ‘essential’ traffic. It is more difficult to define exactly what traffic is ‘essential’. Some journeys bring a direct economic benefit to the trip-maker – for example, commuting to bring in a wage – or to their employer. These journeys can be considered ‘essential’ and high value, but it may not be necessary for them to be made by car, if an alternative of equivalent quality and cost is available. Similarly, journeys can be essential for other reasons - attending school or medical appointments for example - but using the car may be unnecessary. Other journeys are traditionally considered more ‘discretionary’ in terms of the choice of the trip maker – such as shopping, leisure and socialising – but are still essential for the economy, as people spend money out and about, and provide vital social interaction.
TfL conducted research asking London residents to classify how important they thought it was that a range of journeys could be made by car. Very few people thought that it was essential for all trips to be able to be made by car, but very few people thought that the car was never necessary. Most fell somewhere in the middle, and believed that some car journeys were more essential than others. Figure 64 shows the factors considered important in determining whether a trip should be able to be made by car. Whilst London residents did consider work trips more important than leisure trips, this was less important than, for example, if someone was sick or disabled, was travelling with children or goods, or may be concerned about their safety. In general, the consensus was that an alternative needed to be within 10 minutes of the time taken by car to be considered acceptable, although a considerable minority thought that an alternative was only acceptable if it was quicker. This research suggests that it is acceptable to reduce car travel as long as it remains possible to make essential journeys.
**Figure 64** Factors which determine the perceived importance of being able to travel by car for a given journey
Source: City Planning The potential to reduce travel by car
Research suggests that there is the potential to deliver mode shift from the car if the right policies were put in place. Analysis suggests three quarters of existing car trips have an alternative available, based on the known characteristics of the trip and trip maker, shown in Figure 65. Shorter trips were more likely to have an alternative available: around nine in ten journeys less than 5km had an alternative available compared to around one in six trips over 8km (see Figure 66). Shorter trips are also more likely to have more than one alternative option available. It’s more difficult to assess if the quarter of car journeys made by non-Londoners have an alternative available, but it is reasonable to assume that some do.
Figure 65 Potential for existing car journeys to be made by a sustainable mode
Source: City Planning There is the potential to deliver mode shift from the car all across London, but the greatest potential - in terms of the number of trips that could be made by an alternative mode – is in outer London, as shown in Figure 67 below. This is challenging as outer Londoners are more committed to travelling by car and less amenable to using other modes, particularly cycling. 40 per cent of trips that could potentially be made by cycle are made by people who rarely or never cycle and who tell us that they would not consider cycling. It is also a challenge because the sheer size of outer London means that it is difficult to deliver significant change to the network.
Source: City Planning Figure 67 Potential for existing car journeys to be made by a sustainable mode, by distance, by origin
Source: City Planning
Around a quarter of all car journeys made by London residents do not have a realistic alternative mode available – they can only be made by car at present. These journeys are predominantly in less well connected parts of Outer London, reflecting the need to embed different priorities and aspirations for modal shift for different areas in London. Figure 68 shows an estimate of ‘car dependency’ in London – highlighting places where people are more likely to need to use the car to access opportunities and services. In these parts of London, improving access to public transport, particularly buses, and cycle routes has the potential to ‘unlock’ mode shift by making new journeys possible by modes other than the car. In terms of interaction between modes, the strongest link with car is travel by bus, so if car use is decreased the mode most likely to be used more is bus (and vice versa). With better public transport options, trips that currently ‘have’ to be made by car could be made by another mode instead. The fact that the potential exists for mode shift presents an opportunity. However, having an alternative available does not mean that people will switch. Their current preference is to use the car for the journeys they are making, and so one of a number of things would have to change for this choice to change, described in Figure 69 overleaf.
### Figure 69 How change happens
| Driver of change | Impact | Challenge | |------------------|--------|-----------| | **Discovering a better alternative** | Evidence from the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games was that this was particularly common where people were making an infrequent or unfamiliar trip, generally for shopping, leisure or other personal business purposes. In contrast, commuters generally had a good knowledge of the options available to them and few discovered a better option as a result of changes they made during the Games. | The challenge is to prevent a ‘car first’ mentality and create an environment in which people look at the sustainable options first, only using the car as a last resort. | | **Improved alternatives** | Where services are better, people are more likely to use them and less likely to travel by car – 75% of households in the least well connected parts of London own a car, compared to just 38% of those in the best connected places. Investment in cycle infrastructure has seen increases in cycle travel on those routes, and walking has increased where there has been investment in the public realm. | The challenge is to deliver a public transport and cycle network, and street environment that mean that sustainable modes are the best option for most journeys – quick, convenient and pleasant, and cost effective. | | **Current choice worsens** | When travelling by car gets more expensive, fewer people do it. The introduction of the Congestion Charge led to a 30% reduction in chargeable vehicles and car travel falls as fuel price rise. Car travel has fallen as congestion has risen. Londoners have told us that the car is becoming less convenient, driven by factors such as stress, difficulty parking, and unpredictable journey times. | The challenge is to deter people from travelling by car when it is not necessary, without unreasonably constraining access to opportunities and services, or preventing participation in the community. | | **Changing circumstances** | Most changes in car use (over 90%) are associated with a change in circumstances or a life event, most commonly a change in job, moving house, or a change in family circumstances. Once drivers are prompted to think about their travel, other motivations come to play, such as a desire to save money or get fit. | The challenge is to ensure that when change happens, it is easy to make a sustainable choice – for example by ensuring new homes and workplaces are well served by sustainable transport. | | **Changing preferences** | Traditionally, the car has been seen as providing freedom, independence, and status, and learning to drive has long been seen as a ‘rite of passage’ to adulthood. There is evidence that young people’s attitudes are changing, with fewer choosing to get a driver’s license. And many Londoners choose to live without a car, considering it an unnecessary hassle. | The challenge is to create a city in which people do not feel they need a car to provide freedom or independence, or to participate fully in society – a place where they can live happily car-free. | Some people are more amenable to change than others. This partly reflects their life stage: younger people’s lives change more often as they start their careers, climb up the housing ladder, form partnerships and start a family. These wider life changes create opportunities for changes to travel behaviour. By contrast, as people get older their lives become more settled, incomes tend to rise and they are more likely to live in suburban areas, all making it more likely that they will settle into a pattern of habitual car use. Figure 70 shows the impact of life stage on car dependency. Over the past 15 years, London’s growth has come from a rising population of younger working-age adults, who wanted to live more centrally and were happy to live without a car. A London with more older people in it would lead to a more settled population who were, unless tomorrow’s older people are very different to today’s, less amenable to change.
**Figure 70** Relationship between life stage, car dependency and other factors influencing travel behaviour choices
| LIFESTAGE | young Adults | without children | young children | older children | children left home | retired | |-----------------|--------------|------------------|----------------|----------------|--------------------|---------| | CAR DEPENDENCY | | | | | | | | LIFESTYLE EVENTS| more | | | | | less | | WEALTH | | | | | | | | HOME LOCATION | urban | | | | | suburban|
Source: Roads Task Force Technical Note 16: Understanding why people change behaviour (TfL 2013)
TfL has developed a bespoke segmentation tool, the Transport Classification of Londoners or TCOL, to help us understand the characteristics of the London population in terms of their lifestyle and travel preferences, and how amenable to change they are. The tool uses data from the GLA’s London Output Area Classification, based on the 2011 Census; TfL’s segmentation survey; and the London Travel Demand Survey. TCOL helps us identify what type of people are living in London, what their preferences are, how amenable they are to change and what might be effective in persuading them to change. The classification is summarised in Figure 71 whilst Figure 72 shows London’s population by the propensity to reduce car use, based upon this classification. This shows that residents of inner London are more amenable to change and more likely to reduce their car use than residents of outer London. In general, residents of the least densely populated boroughs have the lowest propensity to reduce their car use. This presents a challenge to transport planners as – inevitably – the areas with the highest car mode shares contain the people least willing to consider shifting from the car. Figure 71 Transport Classification for London (TCOL)
Mainly in inner London:
- Urban Mobility: Young workers, high income, low car, high cycle/PT (11%) Change score: 110
- Family Challenge: Low income families, high bus use (7%) Change score: 116
- Students & Graduates: Young adults, low car, high bus and walking (13%) Change score: 100
- Affordable Transitions: New jobs & families, low car, high bus/active (6%) Change score: 136
Mainly in central London:
- Educational Advantage: Well educated, high income, high PT/active, low car (6%) Change score: 117
- City Living: High income, high PT esp. Tube/active travel (7%) Change score: 102
Mainly in outer London:
- Suburban Moderation: Families with children, high car use, some bus use (19%) Change score: 97
- Settled Suburbia: Lower income families, high car use (9%) Change score: 89
- Detached retirement: ‘Empty nest’/retired, very high car (2%) Change score: 80
Source: City Planning Notes: Per cent in brackets refers to proportion of population in each group. A change score over 100 means someone is more likely than average to change behaviour, under 100 less likely.
Figure 72 Propensity to reduce car use, by Lower Super Output Area (LSOA)
Source: City Planning The relative ease of realising mode shift will reflect the quality/convenience of alternatives and also how amenable the trip maker is to change. Based on a combined analysis of trips that could feasibly be made by another mode with segmentation data from TCOL, Figure 73 shows the composition of car trips by the quality of the available alternative and whether the trip-maker is amenable to change. The definitions used are as follows:
- A ‘Good’ alternative is defined as a trip which would be quicker or the same speed by PT, would take no more than 20 minutes by bike (defined as under 5km) or 10 minutes on foot (defined as under 1km).
- A ‘Middling’ alternative is defined as a trip which would take no more than 10 minutes longer by PT, or could be cycled in up to 45 minutes or walked in up to 20 minutes.
The importance of tackling both the ‘pull’ and ‘push’ factors determining travel choices is clear – 2.83 million trips which could be switched to a more sustainable mode are made by people who are committed to travelling by car and reluctant to consider other alternatives. It is unlikely that interventions targeted only at improving the alternatives would be sufficient to persuade this group to change mode.
**Figure 73** Trips currently made by car that could feasibly be made by another mode, by the quality of the alternative and the propensity to change of the trip-maker
| Middling alternative | Good alternative | |----------------------|------------------| | **Top 3 segments** | | | 126k private vehicle trips | 585k private vehicle trips | | This group may consider shifting if the alternative options were better publicised or slightly more competitive, as this group is most amenable to considering an alternative option. | This group represents the best opportunity for change and may be amenable to information about their alternatives. They will be most responsive to service improvements and initiatives to improve conditions for walking and cycling. | | **Middle 3 segments** | | | 222k private vehicle trips | 1,030k private vehicle trips | | This group may be reluctant to change given the potential inconvenience of switching from the car, but may shift in response to a significant change in the quality or cost of alternatives. | This group, whilst having a good alternative available to them, are still reasonably attached to the car, and may shift if travel by car becomes less appealing or if the alternative options were better publicised or slightly more competitive. | | **Bottom 3 segments** | | | 605k private vehicle trips | 2,830k private vehicle trips | | This group has a strong attachment to the car and their trip is likely to be longer or more inconvenient if they were to switch. But – may shift in response to a significant change in the quality or cost of alternatives. | This group has a strong attachment to the car and may be reluctant to change even where a good alternative exists and are unlikely to respond to information. But – may shift if travel by car became less appealing. |
Source: City Planning The volume of car travel in London leads to noisy, polluted and unpleasant streets, deterring active travel and damaging health. The congestion caused by excess traffic brings stress and economic costs to drivers, as well as slowing down bus journeys. London residents recognise that some car journeys are more essential than others, and analysis shows that three quarters of car journeys could be made by a more sustainable mode. However, we know that many Londoners, particularly those who drive the most, are committed to travelling by car and relatively unwilling to try alternatives. Delivering mode shift will require changes to people’s preferences, and to the relative appeal of travel by car and the alternatives. In reality, this means that car travel would need to be less appealing, and the other modes more appealing, to deliver significant change and realise the potential that has been identified. 4.8 Summary: Healthy Streets and healthy people
Walking is an active and enjoyable way to travel and more people could walk rather than drive.
At present, Londoners walk more than people living elsewhere in the UK, with 30 per cent of all trips in London made on foot. The shift from the car to public transport has brought with it huge increases in the amount of walking done to access stations and stops, but the share of journeys walked all the way has remained the same for several decades. Nevertheless, there is potential to deliver mode shift to walking, particularly for short journeys in outer London currently made by car. Doing so will mean meeting expectations for a Healthy Street environment. Whilst the car remains a cheap and convenient option, people will continue to drive walkable journeys.
Cycling is an efficient and healthy way to get about and there is considerable potential for growth in cycle travel.
Cycling is now a major transport mode in London, with 670 thousand journeys made each day. Cycle growth has been particularly strong in central London, with flows across the central cordon increasing by more than 200 per cent since 2001. The rise of cycling has reflected considerable investment in infrastructure to make the experience safer and more appealing but there is much more to be done in order to truly make London feel like a city for cycling. Cycling is the mode of transport with the greatest untapped potential in London. There are 8.2 million trips currently made by a motorised mode that could feasibly be cycled, with a further 1.6 million that could be cycled part of the way. Many journeys could be cycled in under 20 minutes, and for many journeys cycling would be quicker than the current mode of travel used. Cycling is cheap, efficient and reliable, and most people agree that cycling can be a pleasant way to get about. People that don’t currently cycle in London can be concerned about safety and worried that cycling may not be a convenient option for them – to help them start cycling means overcoming a range of practical and attitudinal barriers. More high quality, safe and pleasant routes, supported by plentiful and secure parking, will encourage new people to start cycling and existing cyclists to cycle more.
Vision Zero for London means our long term vision is to reduce road danger so that no deaths or serious injuries occur on London’s streets – in 2015, nearly 2,100 people were killed or seriously injured on London’s streets.
In 2015, 2,092 people were killed or seriously injured (KSIs) on London’s streets, 42 per cent below the 2005-09 baseline. The previous target was met six years early and London is on-track to achieve the target established in 2015 of a 50 per cent reduction in KSIs by 2020. Current forecasts show that if progress continued at a similar rate, KSIs would continue to fall to around 1,000 by 2040.
However, the proportion of KSIs made up of vulnerable road users has risen, as the greatest reduction has been amongst car occupants, and more than 2,000 people were killed or seriously injured on London’s roads in 2015. Delivering Vision Zero will only be achieved through reducing the dominance of motorised traffic on London’s roads and tackling all sources of road danger. Buses and coaches are disproportionately involved in collisions with pedestrians and cyclists and in the last three years there were on average 200 people killed or seriously injured in collisions involving buses or coaches.
**Improving the safety and security of transport and travelling in London remains a priority**
The recent terror attacks in London and Manchester have highlighted the importance of ongoing efforts to reduce the likelihood and impact of these terrible incidents on London’s streets and public transport networks and to improve the safety and security of transport and travelling.
Crime on the TfL public transport network fell more than 50 per cent between 2005/06 and 2016/17. Concerns about the risk of crime and disorder can act as a barrier to travel – surveys carried out in 2016 found that 18 per cent of Londoners could recall an incident in the last three months which had made them feel worried about their personal safety, and women, black and minority ethnic and disabled Londoners are more likely to be concerned about their safety. In future, reducing crime and improving people’s confidence to travel will be challenging in the context of the threat of terrorism, financial constraints, growing passenger numbers and the changing risk and nature of crime.
**Rising traffic and falling road capacity for private vehicles means that congestion will rise for essential traffic**
Congestion causes stress and frustration, and limits the amount people can travel because journeys are slow and unpredictable. For businesses, congestion costs money as workers spend time queuing in traffic, it is difficult to make deliveries on time, and an unreliable road network harms the reputation of London. Bus journeys become slower and less reliable. Despite a falling car mode share, without further action traffic is expected to rise across much of London, with 8.6 million more kilometres travelled by road on average day in 2041 compared to 2015. Over the same period, the amount of space available for use by general road traffic is expected to reduce by 3 per cent, more in central London. By 2041 the average Londoner could waste two and a half days a year sitting in congested traffic.
In central London, weekday daytime congestion has now returned to levels not seen since the introduction of the Congestion Charge in 2003 and outside of charging hours, traffic, speeds and congestion on the central London road network in the evenings and at weekends are as bad or worse than during charging hours, affecting central London’s appeal as a shopping, leisure and entertainment destination.
**Industry trends and economic growth will lead to more freight traffic, especially vans**
London’s continued success critically relies on safe, reliable, sustainable and efficient goods delivery and servicing – it is estimated that freight adds approximately £7.5 billion to the GVA of London. As London grows, the demand for freight activity will grow accordingly but, as with all travel, we must ensure that this need is met in a way that minimises its negative impact on the rest of the city. Between 2015 and 2041, van traffic is expected to increase by a quarter as a result of trends in ecommerce, an increase in just-in-time deliveries, and lengthening supply chains. For Healthy Streets, we need to achieve population and jobs growth without a matching rise in car travel
Since its invention, the car has provided welcome connectivity and opened up new opportunities. Even in a densely populated city such as London, some journeys can only reasonably be made by car. But the amount of space that can or should be taken up by private road transport is limited, and the population is growing. Over the past 15 years, car use has been falling despite a rising population. Furthermore, car ownership is linked to inactivity – 70 per cent of people without a car do some active travel in a day, compared to 40 to 50 per cent of car owners – and car traffic causes emissions damaging to health and the environment and road danger. Traffic clogged streets deter people from walking and cycling and damage quality of life. Underlying the challenge of delivering Healthy Streets and healthy people in London is a basic need to deliver population and jobs growth without a commensurate rise in car travel.
Three quarters of car trips could be made by a more sustainable mode, but many people are reluctant to change
There remains great potential to deliver mode shift from the car to more sustainable modes across London, and particularly in outer London – 74 per cent of all Londoners’ car trips and 93 per cent of car trips under 2km could feasibly be made by an alternative mode. Some people are more amenable to change than others – the challenge is that the greatest amount of car use happens in places where people are most committed to travelling by car and least willing to change. Delivering mode shift requires changing people’s preferences. In practice, realising the potential that has been identified would mean car travel becoming less appealing and other modes more appealing in terms of their cost, convenience and freedom from stress. 5 Environment
Transport in London affects the local environment and quality of life in the city, and emissions from London’s transport contribute to climate change. Currently, road transport is responsible for half of the main air pollutants harmful to human health. This section considers the range of environmental challenges facing London today and over the next 25 years, including emissions, noise, the built and natural environment and the need to adapt to a changing climate.
Environment: Summary
- Nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) and particulate matter (PM) pollutants are collectively estimated to cause around 9,400 equivalent deaths every year in Greater London and impose an economic cost somewhere between £1.4bn and £3.7bn a year.
- London is not compliant with legal limit values for NO₂ and is not expected to achieve compliance until 2025. About a quarter of London’s roads are forecast to be non-compliant with NO₂ levels in 2020 and of these, more than four in ten require a reduction of more than a quarter in road transport emissions to achieve compliance.
- London is compliant with EU limit values in terms of levels of PM smaller than 2.5 micrograms (PM₂.₅) but does not meet levels recommended by the World Health Organisation of PM smaller than 2.5 micrograms and is not expected to do so until well after 2030. Whilst new technologies such as regenerative braking have the potential to reduce emissions somewhat, all vehicles, including those that are zero emission from the tailpipe, create PM emissions through their tyres and brakes and thus mode shift from the car is the only effective solution.
- The Mayor has stated his ambition for a zero carbon London by 2050 and yet the current situation is that CO₂ emissions from road transport are forecast to reduce by around 50 per cent in 2050 compared to 2013. Long term emissions reductions will depend on technological advancement but will also require significant reductions in car use.
- London’s transport CO₂ includes emissions arising from the taxiing, take-off and landing of aircraft at Heathrow and City Airports. There is no national policy to fully decarbonise aviation and the expansion of Heathrow would significantly increase CO₂ emissions.
- More than 1.6 million people in London are exposed to road traffic noise levels during the day above the level defined by the World Health Organisation as causing health problems. Heathrow alone exposes 750,000 people to significant aircraft noise and with a third runway that number could increase to almost a million people.
- For London, failing to adapt to climate change will damage the operational reliability of the transport network. Increases in extreme weather events brought by climate change threaten the resilience of the transport network and may increase the cost and complexity of maintaining operational performance standards. Failure to adapt could make London a less appealing place to live, work and do business. 5.1 Air quality
Transport is the biggest source of emissions damaging to health in London: around half of emissions (NOx and particulate matter (PM)) in Greater London come from road transport. High levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) and particulate matter (PM) damages the health of London residents, with transport a significant contributor to these pollutants. These pollutants are collectively estimated to cause around 9,400 equivalent deaths and 3,150 hospital admissions (from respiratory and cardiovascular events) every year in Greater London. The economic cost is somewhere between £1.4bn and £3.7bn a year. There is strong evidence that poor air quality affects children’s lung development, and emerging evidence that improving air quality can reverse those effects. There is also increasing evidence of the link between exposure to pollution and dementia. A substantial reduction in deaths and hospitalisations could be achieved by a drastic reduction in pollutant emissions in Greater London.
The communities suffering the most from poor air quality are often the most vulnerable in society. The health impacts of air pollution fall disproportionately on the most vulnerable communities, affecting the poorest, the youngest, oldest and those from minority ethnic groups more acutely. Populations living in the most deprived areas are on average currently more exposed to poor air quality than those in less deprived areas. Over 360 primary schools and 442 other educational institutions in the capital are located in areas exceeding safe legal pollution levels.
Legal limits (called ‘limit values’) have been set for concentrations of pollutants in outdoor air which have been transposed into English law. London’s air quality has improved significantly and London is now legally compliant for all pollutants except nitrogen dioxide (NO₂). Failure to meet these limits may result in significant fines being imposed on the UK Government under EU law. Although DEFRA has ultimate responsibility for meeting EU limit values and reporting on compliance, the Mayor leads on the implementation of measures in London.
Nitrogen Oxides
In 2013, around half of nitrogen oxide (NOₓ) emissions in London came from ground-based transport, this is expected to reduce to about 20 per cent by 2030 as result of cleaner vehicles in the vehicle fleet over time. Figure 74 shows the sources of NOₓ emissions in London. Figure 74 Estimated source of NO\\textsubscript{x} emissions, 2008 to 2030
Figure 75 shows annual mean NO\\textsubscript{2} concentrations in 2013 and Figure 76 shows the expected NO\\textsubscript{x} emissions by vehicle type for the period 2020 to 2050. Under the most recent government plans, London will not comply with legal limits for NO\\textsubscript{2} until 2025, 15 years after the original deadline. About 25 per cent of London’s roads are forecast to remain non-compliant with NO\\textsubscript{2} by 2020. Of these, about a third require reductions of between 25 and 50 per cent of road transport NO\\textsubscript{x} emissions, and a tenth require at least a 50 per cent reduction. However, reductions in emissions from other sources in London (such as from domestic and commercial heating) and from sources outside London also play an important roll in delivering improving air quality over time. The introduction of ‘real-world’ testing for cars and vans into the ‘Euro 6’ European vehicle-type approval process should mean that new vehicles are far less polluting than previous models. Real world testing has proved this to be effective for lorries, buses and coaches.
Diesel is the most significant source of nitrogen oxide (NO\\textsubscript{x}) emissions – diesel vehicles emit significantly more NO\\textsubscript{x} than petrol. The reason for this is partly because of the under-performance of diesel light vehicle emission standards (cars and vans) over time, with significant discrepancies between official emission measurements and real-world vehicle performance in urban environments. Diesel vehicles have been incentivised by national Government in order to achieve CO\\textsubscript{2} savings, at the expense of local air quality – reversing the ‘dieselisation’ of the fleet by simply reverting to petrol vehicles would do the reverse, reducing air quality pollutants but increasing carbon emissions, however this can be balanced with petrol hybrid and plug-in hybrid vehicles which would provide additional reductions in CO\\textsubscript{2} emissions over a purely conventional petrol vehicle. Figure 75 Baseline NO$\_2$ concentrations, 2013
Source: City Planning, London Atmospheric Emissions Inventory 2013 (Update)
Figure 76 Baseline (without interventions proposed in MTS) NO$\_x$ emissions, 2020 to 2050
Source: City Planning Particulate matter (PM)
About 50 per cent of small particle (PM$_{10}$) pollutants in London come from ground-based transport. London is currently compliant with EU limit values in terms of levels of PM smaller than 2.5 micrograms (PM$_{2.5}$). However, while there is no safe level for particulates, London does not meet levels recommended by the World Health Organisation (WHO) of PM smaller than 2.5 micrograms. The current legal limit is an annual mean of 25 micrograms per metre cubed and the WHO recommended limit is 10 micrograms per metre cubed. Without further action; this is projected to be the case until well after 2030. Figure 77 shows the forecast concentrations of PM$\_{2.5}$ that are expected across London by 2030 unless further action is taken.
Figure 77 Baseline (without interventions proposed in MTS) PM$\_{2.5}$ concentrations, 2030 compared to WHO limits
At present, over 75 per cent of PM emissions from road transport come from tyre and brake wear and by 2030, estimates suggest this may increase to 90 per cent. Figure 78 shows the forecast profile of PM emissions from road transport between 2020 and 2050. Initial reductions are delivered through measures designed to clean up vehicle exhausts, after this, emissions increase in line with traffic. Whilst new technologies, including the use of regenerative braking, have the potential to reduce emissions somewhat, all vehicles, including those that are zero emission from the tailpipe, create PM emissions through their tyres and brakes and thus mode shift from the car is the only effective solution. Figure 78 Baseline (without interventions proposed in MTS) PM emissions from road transport, 2020 to 2050
Source: City Planning 5.2 Climate change
Climate change is a serious threat to global quality of life. Figure 79 summarises why climate change matters globally – and, section 5.3 of this report lays out the possible implications of a changing climate on London’s transport network. Carbon dioxide concentration is 40 per cent higher than in pre-industrial times and between 1880 and 2012, the earth’s surface warmed by 0.85°C Celsius. Transport emissions account for 23 per cent of CO₂ emissions in London and thus London’s transport providers must play a significant part in reducing carbon emissions.
Figure 79 Summary of Global Climate Change Challenge
Reality Check
1. **Carbon dioxide** concentration is 40% higher than in pre-industrial times.
2. **Human activity** caused most of the warming between 1951 and 2010.
3. Earth’s surface **warmed 0.85°C** over the period 1880 to 2012.
4. **Heatwaves and heavy rains** have become more frequent since the 1950s.
5. **Arctic sea ice has declined** on average 3.8% per decade since 1979.
6. **Global sea level is expected to rise** between 26 and 82 cm by 2100.
7. Only an **aggressive mitigation scenario** can keep temperature rise below 2°C.
Source: IPCC Working Group 1: Fifth Assessment Report
The EU has committed to cutting its CO₂ emissions to 20 per cent below 1990 levels by 2020 and has offered to increase this to 30 per cent if other major emitting countries in the developed and developing worlds increase their commitments. The Climate Change Act 2008 set the UK’s emission reduction targets - the legally binding target is a reduction of at least 80 per cent by 2050 (against the 1990 baseline). London’s Climate Change Mitigation and Energy Strategy (CCMES) published in 2011 sets a target of a 60 per cent reduction in CO₂ by 2025 compared to 1990. The Mayor’s goal is more ambitious – his aim is for a zero carbon London by 2050. The current situation is that CO₂ emissions from road transport are forecast to reduce by around 50 per cent in 2050 compared to 2013 (shown in Figure 80). While transport CO₂ emissions are projected to have fallen by more than 2 million tonnes by 2025 from 1990 levels, they will still be 2.35 million tonnes above the target previously set for 2025. Meeting this would require a reduction in emissions equivalent to a 40 per cent reduction in road traffic. The current trajectory (without further action) leaves a lot to do in the period 2030-50 and much more would be required throughout the period to 2050, and particularly in the early years of the Strategy, to deliver the Mayor’s goal.
**Figure 80** Total transport CO₂, no Heathrow, baseline (without interventions proposed in MTS), 2013 to 2050
Delivery will be particularly challenging given the growing population, the lack of progress to date and the fact that measures designed to improve air quality, such as the reversal of dieselisation, could have the effect of increasing CO₂ emissions. Technological advances will reduce vehicle emissions but this will be made quicker and more feasible if the distance travelled by car is reduced.
Long term emissions reduction is dependent on the transition to zero emission vehicles which will only happen if the infrastructure and incentives are in place to support an ambitious rate of conversion to electric vehicles and alternative technologies.
London’s bus fleets are on a pathway to reach zero emission by 2037 and taxis and private hire vehicles by 2033. London’s rail services are primarily electric and their CO₂ emissions will decrease in line with the decarbonisation of the energy supply. Improving the energy efficiency of rail services will also reduce pressure on the grid. and support decarbonisation. Achieving zero carbon will also require government to electrify all remaining diesel lines into London.
Long term electrification of the road vehicle fleet will add significant additional demand to London’s energy system, increase the challenge of reducing CO₂ from electricity and reaching the zero carbon target. The forthcoming London Environment Strategy will set out measures to manage London’s future energy system needs including transport.
London’s transport CO₂ includes emissions arising from the taxiing, take-off and landing of aircraft at Heathrow and City Airports. Plans to build a third runway at Heathrow are unclear on what this would mean for meeting the UK’s climate change targets.
In order for London to play its appropriate role in reducing carbon emissions and meet the Mayor’s ambition for a zero carbon London by 2050, action will need to be taken to support the transition to zero emission vehicles alongside a significant shift away from private motorised modes and towards more sustainable modes. 5.3 Noise and the natural and built environment
Noise from transport
The World Health Organisation identifies environmental noise as the second largest environmental risk to public health in Western Europe. Noise affects health directly by causing sleep disturbance, stress/anxiety and damage to mental health, high blood pressure, cognitive impairment in children (and related impacts on school performance) and increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Indirectly, noise also discourages people from doing activities which are good for their physical and mental health, such as walking, cycling and socialising or participating in leisure activities. Exposure to noise from transport damages the health of Londoners, particularly those living on busy roads or on the flight path.
Many Londoners are not adversely affected by noise from transport, with average satisfaction with the reasonableness of noise from transport standing at 77 out of 100 London-wide. However, for those who are affected by noise, the most common cause of this noise disturbance is road traffic and more than 1.6 million people in London are exposed to road traffic noise levels during the day above 55dB, the level defined by the World Health Organisation as causing health problems. Particularly for Londoners living on a busy road or on the flight path, or close to construction works, noise is a source of disturbance:
- 29 per cent of London residents said they were disturbed by traffic noise, including 9 per cent disturbed to a great extent; and
- 20 per cent of London residents said they were disturbed by aircraft noise, including 6 per cent disturbed to a great extent.
Heathrow alone exposes 750,000 people to significant aircraft noise (above 55dB) – the majority of whom reside in west and southwest London – and which amounts to 28 per cent of all those exposed to noise by airports across Europe. With a third runway, that number could increase to almost a million people.
The natural and built environment
London’s built heritage and sites of cultural importance include four world heritage sites, 19,000 nationally listed buildings and their settings, locally listed assets and their settings, 1,000 conservation areas, over 150 registered parks and gardens and over 150 scheduled monuments. Buildings make a significant contribution to defining the identity and character of London, through their design and the associated public realm.
London’s built heritage and sites of cultural importance are vitally important to defining the character of the city. But, they could be potentially under threat as a result of the development of new transport infrastructure. As well as affecting human health, road vehicle emissions also adversely impact on the natural and built environment. They can lead to dirty deposits on buildings and the corrosion of some building materials. Increasing levels of nitrogen in the soil also result in damage to natural ecosystems.
A biodiverse natural environment provides many physical and mental health benefits and aids access to green space. Transport land accounts for 14 per cent of land in London and 25 per cent of land in central London. Therefore, how we use transport land has a significant impact on biodiversity in London. Nationwide, the goal is to conserve biodiversity. This will be challenging given competing demands for land for housing and transport infrastructure. As London becomes more urban, access to green space will become more important, and transport land can contribute. Figure 81 shows localities that are more than one kilometre’s walking distance from a publicly accessible Site of Borough or Metropolitan Importance for Nature Conservation. Opportunities to provide green infrastructure on transport land include street trees, green roofs on buildings and roadside raingardens. Such features can provide a range of benefits including improved resilience to severe weather and climate change, better air and water quality, the encouragement of walking and cycling, and enhanced biodiversity. Street trees provide shade, shelter and a cooling effect, helping to reduce the urban heat island effect and enabling everyone to use our streets.
**Figure 81 Deficiencies in Access to Nature**
As a large consumer of resources, such as building materials used for new infrastructure and energy to run public transport, there are significant opportunities for transport providers to decrease consumption of natural resources and minimise and re-use waste in order to reduce impacts on the natural environment. Resilience to the impacts of climate change
London is already suffering from the adverse effects of climate change – summers are getting warmer and winters are getting wetter. Unmitigated climate change would mean that the summer of 2003, where we broke the highest temperature record in the UK (37°C) and an estimated 2,000 UK residents died, will be considered an average summer by the 2040s and a cool summer by the 2080s. Figure 82 shows the average surface temperature during the hot summer of 2006.
Figure 82 Average surface temperature during summer 2006
Major flooding has occurred in London in three of the last four years – causing significant disruption to transport and having a detrimental impact on the economy. Whilst annual rainfall is likely to remain broadly similar to current levels, seasonal changes are likely to mean summers becoming drier and winters wetter. The rainfall that does occur is likely to be in more intense storms. This will increase the risk of flooding, especially surface-water flooding. The equivalent of two-and-a-half Hyde Parks is being paved with impermeable surfaces every year, which is resulting in an increase in surface water flooding. The installation of more permeable surfaces, including Sustainable Drainage Systems, on transport land can help make London as a whole more resilient to surface, river and sewer related floods.
London is likely to be at higher risk of drought as there will be less water to be captured in the summer, and quite possibly more demand on water during the hotter periods. Current projections estimate that the sea level will rise by around 0.9m by the end of the century. This will require moderate-scale action and investment over the short to medium term (up to 2050) to maintain London’s current good standard of tidal flood protection. Beyond 2050, sea-level rise is expected to become more significant. Greater investment, including a new Thames Barrier, may be required to protect London from tidal flooding.
In particular, the increased incidence of extreme weather conditions is expected to present a range of challenges to the operation of the transport network, such as:
- Flooding – affecting stations, roads and tracks and cutting power supplies, as in February 2014.
- Extreme heat – leading to materials failure, need for ventilation and cooling, and issues with passenger health and discomfort affecting operational performance.
- Humidity, drought, storm winds – affects signalling, ground movement and leads to debris on tracks.
- Hail, freeze thaw, snow and ice – blocks drains, affects signalling, damages embankments, cuttings and road surfaces, and leads to operational costs for gritting and repairs.
Events such as the closure of large sections of London’s rail network in June 2016 due to flooding highlighted the potential disruption that can be caused. The costs of these impacts are hard to quantify, but the 2006 Stern review estimated that the costs of uncontrolled climate change could be between 5-20 per cent of GDP, whereas the costs of acting now were estimated at between 1-2 per cent of GDP.
For London, failing to adapt to climate change will damage the operational reliability of the transport network. Increases in extreme weather events brought by climate change threaten the resilience of the transport network and may increase the cost and complexity of maintaining operational performance standards. Failure to adapt could make London a less appealing place to live, work and do business. 5.4 Summary: environment
Poor air quality damages health and causes the equivalent of up to 9,400 deaths per year
Transport is the biggest source of emissions damaging to health in London - around half of emissions (NO\\textsubscript{x} and particulate matter) come from road transport. These pollutants are collectively estimated to cause around 9,400 equivalent deaths every year in Greater London and impose an economic cost somewhere between £1.4bn and £3.7bn a year. London is in breach of legal limits on NO\\textsubscript{2} and while there is no safe level for particulates, does not meet levels recommended by the World Health Organisation of PM smaller than 2.5 micrograms (PM\\textsubscript{2.5}). The communities suffering most from poor air quality are often the most vulnerable and at least 360 primary schools are in areas exceeding safe legal pollution levels.
Under the most recent government plans, London will not comply with legal limits for NO\\textsubscript{2} until 2025, 15 years after the original deadline and will exceed World Health Organisation levels of PM\\textsubscript{2.5} until well after 2030. About a quarter of London’s roads are forecast to be non-compliant with NO\\textsubscript{2} levels in 2020 and of these, four in ten require traffic reductions of at least 25 per cent. Three quarters of road transport particulate matter comes from tyre and brake wear. There are limited technological solutions so only a reduction in road traffic can effectively tackle PM in the medium/long term.
Action must be taken to reduce carbon emissions so London can play its part in tackling climate change
Climate change is a serious threat to global quality of life. Carbon dioxide concentration is 40 per cent higher than in pre-industrial times and between 1880 and 2012, the earth’s surface warmed by 0.85° Celsius. London’s transport providers must play their part in delivering reductions in carbon emissions. The Mayor’s ultimate ambition is to make London a zero carbon city by 2050 and yet the current situation is that CO\\textsubscript{2} emissions from road transport are forecast to reduce by around 50 per cent in 2050 compared to 2013. London’s public transport services are on a pathway to zero emissions; emissions from the largely electrified rail network will fall in line with the decarbonisation of the energy supply. Technological advances will reduce vehicle emissions but this will be made quicker and more feasible if the distance travelled by car is reduced.
London’s transport CO\\textsubscript{2} includes emissions arising from the taxiing, take-off and landing of aircraft at Heathrow and City Airports. There is no national policy to fully decarbonise aviation and the expansion of Heathrow would significantly increase CO\\textsubscript{2} emissions.
Noise from transport causes stress and damages the health of Londoners
The World Health Organisation identifies environmental noise as the second largest environmental risk to public health in Western Europe. More than 1.6 million people in London are exposed to road traffic noise levels during the day above 55dB, the level defined by the World Health Organisation as causing health problems. Heathrow alone exposes 750,000 people to significant aircraft noise – the majority of whom reside in west and southwest London – and which amounts to 28 per cent of all those exposed to noise by airports across Europe. With a third runway, that number could increase to almost a million people.
**A biodiverse natural environment is good for nature and good for people**
Transport land accounts for 14 per cent of land in London and how this land is used has a significant impact on biodiversity in London. Nationwide, the goal is to conserve biodiversity. This will be challenging given competing demands for land for housing and transport infrastructure. As London becomes more urban, access to green space will become more important, and transport land can contribute.
**The transport network must be resilient to extreme weather and the adverse effects of climate change**
London is already suffering from the adverse effects of climate change as summers are getting warmer and winters are getting wetter. Major flooding has occurred in London in three of the last four years, causing significant disruption to transport and having a detrimental impact on the economy. For London to remain an attractive place to live, work and visit, the transport system must be resilient to the extreme weather conditions likely to become more common as a result of a changing climate. 6 A good public transport experience
This section describes the current and future challenges affecting London’s extensive public transport network. London’s success as a world city is due in no small part to its integrated public transport network, one of the most extensive in the world. Every day, 13.8 million journeys are made by public transport in London. Public transport is as important for health as it is for connectivity – half of all walking in London is done to or from public transport stations or stops. This section describes London’s public transport network, how it is used now and will be in future, and describes the challenges in terms of customer service, affordability, accessibility, crowding, safety and security. It also describes the future challenge in terms of providing a fit-for-purpose bus network.
A good public transport experience: key findings
- London’s public transport network has been transformed since 2000, delivering a better experience for customers, with significant increases in capacity on all public transport modes. The amount of travel has increased accordingly.
- Demand for public transport services is expected to rise by nearly 50 per cent by 2041, with particularly strong growth expected on the rail network, reflecting planned investment in new capacity and jobs growth in central London.
- The Mayor has frozen fares to make travel more affordable. In recent years, fares have been rising and incomes falling. In the early years of TfL, fares increased at a slower rate than average earnings, and bus fares fell. However, between 2008 and 2015, single Tube fares increased by almost 60 per cent and bus fares increased by even more.
- Customers will expect TfL and London’s other transport providers to get the basics right and deliver journeys that are reliable, easy to plan, stress-free, person-friendly, safe and secure, and comfortable; this will be increasingly challenging as demand rises and emerging technology raises customer expectations.
- By 2041, we expect the number of Londoners over 70 to have grown by 85 per cent and 17 per cent of Londoners will have some form of disability. This growth presents a challenge both because of increased demand for accessible services and because crowding on the network is the biggest barrier to travel.
- Significant improvements have been made, nevertheless, journey times are still considerably longer on the accessible network than the full network and a number of barriers to travel remain.
- Demand for bus travel has grown by 71 per cent since 2000/01, but has started to fall in recent years, largely as result of slowing bus speeds but also reflecting changes to travel patterns. • There is significant potential to deliver mode shift from car to bus, with around three million journeys that could feasibly be made by bus. In order to realise this potential, buses will need to provide connectivity, journey times and convenience to compete with the car.
• Between 2015 and 2031, a significant programme of funded rail and Underground investment will increase the capacity of the rail network by 26 per cent by 2021 and by 34 per cent by 2031.
• In the short term, the new capacity will reduce crowding but with demand increasing faster than supply, by 2041 the crowded passenger experience, defined as passenger-km exceeding a standing passenger density of two people per square metre, is expected to increase by 60 per cent on London Underground and 150 per cent on National Rail.
• Key sectors which have been identified as in need of additional capacity include the North East (Victoria, Piccadilly, Central and Northern lines) – South West corridors (Northern, District, and rail lines to Waterloo); the DLR (Canary Wharf); and Trams (east of Croydon). In order to deliver the capacity that London will need in the 2040s we have to start planning now.
• Congestion within stations leads to delays as passengers move slowly through the station, are forced to wait to board trains, or are disrupted by temporary closures. At present, many London Underground stations suffer regular temporary closures as a result of overcrowding and this is expected to increase.
• With the number of rail passengers travelling into Central London projected to rise considerably over the next twenty years, the need for efficient onward dispersal from Central London’s fourteen rail termini will become even greater. Already, crowding is an issue and the street environment is often poor for those walking and cycling the final part of their journey.
• In recent years, the number of people killed or seriously injured on the London Underground has remained broadly stable, set against growing passenger numbers, and the safety of bus and coach passengers has improved considerably. After many years of safe operation, there was a major tram derailment at Sandilands Junction in November 2016 in which seven people lost their lives and over 50 people were injured. This tragedy serves as a reminder that safety is paramount and that it is vital to work to continuously improve passenger safety despite growing demand for services.
• Over the last ten years, river patronage has doubled with over 10.5 million people travelling on the river in 2016/17 and the Port of London Authority (PLA) Thames Vision has set a target to double annual river patronage to 20 million.
• Coaches provide affordable long distance transport options; however, TfL does not operate services directly but has historically provided the London terminus at Victoria Coach Station.
• Whilst the number of licensed taxis and licensed taxi drivers in London has remained stable for many years, the number of private hire vehicles has increased by 58 per cent since 2008/09 with the number of licensed drivers increasing by 81 per cent over the same period. 6.1 London’s public transport network
London’s public transport network encompasses a dense rail network, incorporating the London Underground, London Overground and rail services operated by TfL as well as a National Rail network of suburban rail services and a network of non-TfL operated commuter coaches. To the east and south east of London is found the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) and Tram services operate in the south of London. Buses operate London-wide throughout the day and night, and river boat services, a commuter coach network and a cable car complete the picture. Figure 83 shows all rail services and Figure 84 all TfL operated bus routes in London.
Figure 83 Map of all London Underground and rail services in London
Source: City Planning Current demand for public transport services
London’s public transport network has been transformed since 2000, delivering a better experience for customers, with significant increases in capacity and service quality on all public transport modes:
- In 2015/16 the Underground carried a total of 1.35 billion journeys, 39 per cent higher than 2000/01. Consistently more than 97 per cent of scheduled services were operated in 2015/16 against 92 per cent in 2000/01.
- Buses carried 2.3 billion journeys in 2015/16, 71 per cent higher than in 2000/01. Bus service reliability has improved by 46 per cent over the period, although recently reliability and patronage have suffered in line with a rise in general traffic congestion.
- National Rail (by London and South East operators) carried 1.18 billion journeys in 2015/16, 78 per cent higher than in 2000/01. General reliability has also improved.
- Patronage has increased considerably on London Overground, carrying 184 million journeys in 2015/16 and over the period since 2000/01, the Docklands Light Railway (DLR) has increased its service offering by 103 per cent, with demand up by 205 per cent.
- Trams – centred on Croydon – carry 27 million passengers per year.
- Significant reductions in transport crime since 2005/06 when crime levels peaked, with a 50 per cent reduction in crime on London Underground, the DLR and the bus network alone. Future demand for public transport services
Demand for public transport services is expected to rise by nearly 50 per cent by 2041. In particular, we expect there to be strong growth in demand for rail services between 2015 and 2041, reflecting the rising population, higher number of jobs particularly in the centre, and investment in the network. Forecasts suggest that the number of passengers on rail and London Underground services will rise by 54 per cent over this period, leading to a 57 per cent increase in the distance travelled by rail.
Unless further action is taken, and notwithstanding the comprehensive recast of the network following the opening of the Elizabeth Line, bus travel is expected to grow more slowly than rail travel, reflecting lower capital investment and service enhancements. The TfL Business Plan proposes a reallocation of bus services from central to inner and outer London. Unmitigated, planned changes to the road network in central London would reduce general traffic and bus speeds. These supply issues are likely to result in less distance travelled by bus in central London and modest growth in inner London. Bus usage would only keep pace with population growth in outer London. Figure 85 shows the forecast changes in demand for public transport services by region.
Figure 85 Change in passenger kilometres travelled by rail and bus, by region, 12 hour average day, 2015 to 2041
Source: City Planning 6.2 Affordability
London is one of the most expensive cities in the world. The biggest driver of living costs in London is house prices. Average house prices are around double the national average, and have risen by 32 per cent since the peak before the financial crisis in 2008. Average private sector rents in London are more than twice the national average and rents have also been rising much faster in London than elsewhere. Wages have not kept up with housing costs and in particular the minimum wage has risen by just 17 per cent over this period. The London Living Wage is an estimate of the earnings required to live above the poverty line in London. More than a fifth of Londoners in work do not receive the London Living Wage.
While transport costs account for a lower share of expenditure than housing, it is still a notable outgoing for many households (especially in outer zones) with average spend on transport fares of £27 per week. The impact of transport costs on households has also been gradually increasing since 2010, with fares spending rising in real terms and incomes falling in the past five years. This impact has been most keenly felt by lower income households with fares rising significantly faster than the National Minimum Wage. Figure 86 shows average housing costs combined with travel costs (assuming two travelcards to zone 1 per household), with the more affordable areas marked in blue and purple. This shows that affordable places to live tend to be further from the centre, and are particularly concentrated in east and south east London. The places with the lowest cost of living also tend to be particularly poorly connected by public transport – for example, Thamesmead, Lewisham, and Ilford stand out here.
Figure 86 Estimated cost of rent and travel for a two-adult household with zone 1 travel
Source: City Planning In the early years of TfL, fares increased at a slower rate than average earnings, and in particular bus fares were reduced while average earnings were increasing.
However, between 2008 and 2015, single Tube fares increased by almost 60 per cent, while bus fares increased by even more (shown in Figure 87). The rate of fares increase during this period was greater than the rate of increase in average earnings. As a result, travel has become more unaffordable for low income fare payers. In 2014, it took at least an additional hour of work at National Minimum Wage to cover travel costs from outer London compared to 2005. The Mayor has frozen fares from 2016.
**Figure 87** Index of bus fares, Tube fares and average weekly earnings (nominal terms), 1999/00 to 2016/17
A range of concessionary fares provide support to a number of groups to help make travel affordable, including the over 60’s card, Freedom Pass for older and disabled people; over 60s pass; free travel for veterans; and discounts for students, apprentices, and those claiming Jobseekers Allowance and other benefits for those seeking work. There are a range of benefits to the various concessions that are available, including the increasing social inclusion by making access to public transport more affordable, and promoting the use of public transport among younger and older Londoners who may otherwise be more likely to travel by car.
Travel costs becoming unaffordable could make it harder for Londoners to make the journeys they need and want to by public transport. 6.3 Customer Service
Transport has a key role in defining life in London - transport has the potential to be one of the best things about living in London but at times is experienced as one of the worst. Since the forming of TfL, indicators of customer satisfaction have shown a steady but continuous upward trend, shown in Figure 88. Nevertheless, occasions where transport operators fail to get the basics right demonstrate a lack of care to customers. The day to day challenge is to run a safe and secure, efficient, reliable and customer-centric service against a backdrop of continuous growth in demand for transport services.
In particular, Figure 88 illustrates the major improvements in satisfaction with journey experiences following the takeover of the franchise by London Overground (shown in orange on this graph) so that customer experience quickly reached similar levels as that of the London Underground and bus networks.
**Figure 88 Customer experience by mode, 2009/10 to 2015/16**
Customer experience is not consistent across all providers. Rail customers in London and the South East are less satisfied than regional and long distance travellers, particularly with punctuality, value for money and room to sit or stand. In Autumn 2016, satisfaction varied by 26 percentage points between the best and worst performing operators. Figure 89 shows customer satisfaction by rail operator. Passengers travelling on Southern and Thameslink services were the least satisfied. TfL’s customer model sets out five aspects of what customers want; these factors contribute to the overall travel experience and drive customer satisfaction:
1. **Reliability**, and therefore congestion on the roads, is at the heart of the customer experience. Customers want to be able to get from A to B, to know how long their journey will take and for their journeys not to be delayed or disrupted.
2. It should be **easy to plan a journey**, to know where to catch the bus or how to find a station, and to buy a ticket for travel or pay the congestion charge. If there are diversions or delays it should be easy to find an alternative route and be reassured you can complete your journey.
3. The system should **minimise stress** - crowding, not being able to get on the first tube or bus, lack of information and the behaviour of other customers or road users all contribute to stress levels.
4. All transport systems should feel like they are designed for people not machines. Customers appreciate it when we recognise the impact we have on them emotionally when they travel in London. So, customers want a **pleasant, welcoming environment**, such as well-lit stations, well designed town centres and green spaces. Staff can have a big impact on customers, especially when they are approachable and helpful.
5. Customers should be **able to travel in comfort**. Personal comfort is influenced by crowding, temperature, noise, cleanliness and being able to get a seat on public transport. Over time, what is considered essential can and does change. In recent years, mobile connectivity has soared, so that seven in ten people now have a Smartphone and around half use a tablet computer. A key consequence of this is increasing customer demand for real time information they can access on their journey. As well as improving its own services, TfL has responded to this by providing travel data freely and openly; there are now 30 data feeds available to developers and more than 360 apps have been developed. TfL launched a re-designed website in April 2014, used by four fifths of Londoners; 263 million tailored email updates across more than 1,000 campaigns were sent out in 2014/15; and TfL has 2.3 million followers on Twitter and Facebook receiving real-time service updates. As technology develops, and customer expectations follow, transport providers will need to continually review the service provided to ensure it meets customer needs.
Customers will expect TfL and London’s other transport providers, and in particular the Train Operating Companies, to provide a consistently good quality service, get the basics right and deliver journeys that are reliable, easy to plan, stress-free, person-friendly, safe and secure, and comfortable; this will be increasingly challenging as demand on the network rises and emerging technology raises customer expectations. 6.4 Accessibility
An inclusive, accessible, affordable transport network benefits all Londoners. Transport provides people with the ability to access work, opportunities and services and to participate in social and community life; an accessible travel environment is a vital requirement for an inclusive society. The need for accessible transport will increase considerably over the coming decades and it is therefore vital that accessibility is embedded into everything we do, tackling barriers to customer service, physical infrastructure and information and marketing across the public and private transport network.
By 2041:
- The number of Londoners over 70 will have grown by 85 per cent; and
- 17 per cent of Londoners (1.8m people) will have some form of disability, 56 per cent more than in 2011.
Population growth will present a challenge for accessibility both because of increased travel demand from those needing accessible services and because crowding on the network is the biggest barrier to travel for vulnerable users.
Significant improvements have been made: 93 per cent of bus stops are now wheelchair accessible and 50 per cent of Overground stations in London are now fully accessible, while London’s buses are entirely low-floor. Nevertheless, journey times are still considerably longer on the accessible network than the full network and a number of barriers to travel remain. Figure 90 shows how many jobs can be accessed within 45 minutes from each residential area in London. These show the stark limitations in access to jobs for people with accessibility needs – and transport is cited as a barrier to accessing employment by three in ten disabled people. Partly as a result of this, disabled people travel less often, making 1.6 trips per person per day compared to around 2.3 for all Londoners.
Accessibility will improve in future as a result of planned and funded upgrades and the opening of the fully accessible Elizabeth Line, but much more still needs to be done. Figure 90 Comparison of the number of jobs accessible within 45 minutes, step-free (upper map) and full (lower map) networks, 2015
Source: City Planning Customer research identifies clear areas to address that will encourage both non-users and users alike to travel more often. Cost, journey time, lack of step-free access and crowding are the clearest deterrents to travel among equalities groups.
- **Improving customer service, particularly on buses.** Currently 54 per cent of disabled people use the bus at least once a week but only 16 per cent uses the tube as often. Improving the customer experience on buses can therefore have a big impact on addressing issues currently cited by disabled passengers. Driver behaviour is the most common accessibility-related complaint and is challenging to address given the multiple operator model; issues with driver attitudes are also a barrier for those travelling by taxi or private hire vehicle. On the tube, the use of ramps and the availability of staff to assist is one of the top complaints. As stations are made step free to platform, the availability of staff and communication between stations will be vital to realising the benefits of the new infrastructure for customers.
- **Improving the pedestrian environment.** Almost all journeys involve walking but currently the pedestrian environment is considered poor by many disabled people, who are much less satisfied with London’s streets than other Londoners. Issues include the poor condition of footway surfaces, obstructions, lack of seating, crowded and narrow pavements, and cyclist presence and behaviour. Traffic speeds are particularly important for older people, who are less able to cross the road quickly and more likely to die if hit by a vehicle.
- **Increasing step-free access.** A quarter of stations on the tube network, half of London Overground stations and all DLR and Tram stations are step free, and the funded programme will provide a further 30 step free stations by 2022. However, there remains a significant difference in journey time between step free and non-step free routes, limiting connectivity to opportunities and services. Once outside the central area, public transport journey time for those who require step free access increases dramatically.
A new measure of physical accessibility is currently under development, to provide a total proportion of the population within 400m of a step free station; this will help prioritise investment to deliver the greatest population benefit. New research suggests we may be underestimating the benefits of step free access in terms of increasing travel opportunities.
- **Providing new capacity to tackle crowding.** For many people with a disability, experiencing overcrowding can deter them from repeating the journey or trying out new routes. Providing additional capacity and reducing crowding benefits all users and, provided it is step free, can be of particular benefit to disabled users.
- **Improving access to information to ensure everyone can access the services available.** Planning in advance is more important to customers with a disability, and they require more information to make plan their journeys, both in advance and in real time as they travel. Marketing and information is also important in terms of making disabled people aware of improvements that have been made – and thus able to take advantage of them – and also to raise awareness amongst the general population of accessibility needs and addressing issues with customer behaviour. 6.5 Shaping the bus network
The role of buses in London
The size of the bus network - more than 95 per cent of households live within 400m of a bus stop - and the affordability of bus services mean that it is the most accessible and most used type of public transport in London, carrying 2.3 billion passengers per year. London’s bus network now carries half of all the bus journeys in England. London buses operate on nearly 700 routes, with 100 routes operating through the night. Figure 91 shows the region of London connected by bus and rail – shown in blue – and the area connected by bus services only – shown in pink. Nearly all populated parts of London are served by the bus network. The map is derived from the London-wide Public Transport Access Index (PTAI) which calculates an access index for an area by combining walk time to the nearest bus stop or station with wait time. The indices are split by mode for a network of 100m grid points across London.
In particular, this shows the vital role played by buses in Outer London. Whereas in Central London, more than 90 per cent of the area is served by bus and rail services, in Outer London the coverage by rail is much less and buses play a more significant role. For example, in Havering, only 11 per cent of the area is served by rail services but 53 per cent has access to bus services.
Figure 91 Connectivity provided by bus and rail services in London
Source: City Planning Buses are the most affordable mode of public transport, with fares currently fixed at £1.50 until 2020 and the new Hopper service allowing interchange within the same fare. Furthermore, around one third of customers don’t pay for their journey at the point of use with significant proportions using bus or freedom passes or making use of other concessionary fare schemes. The size of the network and the affordability of bus services mean that it is the most-used type of public transport in London, carrying 2.3 billion passengers per year. London’s bus network carries half of all the bus journeys in England. As the only public transport service operating throughout the city, bus users reflect London’s diversity and the network’s position as a system for everyone. Figure 92 illustrates the diverse ethnic profile of bus users.
**Figure 92** Ethnicity of bus users, day, night and London average
Source: City Planning
**Changing demand for bus services**
Demand for bus travel has grown by 71 per cent since 2000/01 and around 6.5 million passengers use the network every day.
However, in recent years demand has fallen away somewhat. Bus patronage has declined by 5.6 per cent across 2015/16 and 2016/17 with ridership for 2016/17 123 million trips per annum lower than in 2014/15. Patronage has not fallen uniformly across London. Figure 93 illustrates the drop in bus boarding numbers over the last year. Inspection of this map shows:
- Central London observed the most significant decline in bus boardings (down 12 per cent, Period 2 2015/16 compared to Period 2 2016/17). Demand was expected to reduce as rail capacity came online, but this has occurred sooner than forecast.
- Inner London also saw significant decline (down 6 per cent, for the same period). A number of radial Transport for London Road Network (TLRN) corridors have shown significant declines in bus boardings including the A23, A11 and A2.
- Growth occurred in South London, although declines in boardings were observed around some other outer London town centres such as Croydon.
**Figure 93** Change in bus boardings from Oyster data, full year 2015/16 compared to 2016/17
The primary cause is considered to be the deterioration in bus speeds (2.1 per cent year-on-year, see Figure 94) caused by increased levels of traffic congestion. International case studies show that improving customer experience (particularly improved journey times and reliability) will deliver increased bus patronage and TfL’s has shown that on-bus journey time is the number one issue for bus users. Bus ridership has also been affected by the trend for Londoners to travel less, particularly for their discretionary trips such as for shopping and leisure. Data collected via the London Travel Demand Survey (LTDS) shows that Londoners have been travelling less each day since 2013/14 – shown in Figure 95. Shopping and personal business public transport trips are made predominately by bus (72 per cent of trips made by public transport, shown in Figure 96) and a high proportion occur in the inter-peak. The largest decline in observed bus travel has occurred in the inter-peak period (40 per cent of the total decline) where discretionary trips such as shopping make up two thirds of bus journeys. Discretionary and therefore inter-peak trips have high elasticities to change. Smaller declines were observed for morning and evening peak commuting trips and morning and late afternoon education trips.
This suggests a proportion of bus patronage decline is attributable to Londoners not travelling or reducing their discretionary travel. The causal relationship here is unclear – it could be that Londoners are reducing the amount they travel for journeys typically made by bus due to wider societal factors such as the increase in internet shopping, or it could be that the decline in bus speeds is deterring discretionary trips, which are being replaced by another activity rather than being made by a different mode (or some combination of the two). Figure 95 London Trip Rates by Purpose
| | London Overall Trip | Shopping and Personal Business Trips | Leisure Trips | Bus Trips | |------------------|---------------------|--------------------------------------|---------------|-----------| | 2013/14 Trip Rate| 2.52 | 0.65 | 0.73 | 0.37 | | 2015/16 Trip Rate| 2.32 | 0.57 | 0.66 | 0.33 | | Percentage Difference | -8% | -11% | -10% | -12% |
Source: City Planning
Figure 96 Public Transport trips per day by mode and journey purpose, London residents, 2013/14-2015/16
Source: City Planning
Some of the reduction in bus travel is likely to be a result of people switching to active travel and rail modes. LTDS analysis reveals that although Londoners are travelling less overall, those travelling less frequently by bus have increased their use of other modes. The pattern of take up of other modes broadly reflected the average London-wide mode share, with more than four in ten having increased their car travel. Whilst the switch to active and rail modes may in part reflect enhancements to cycle and rail services, the high proportion who reduced their bus use and increased their use of private motorised modes shows the risk if London’s bus services are not able to offer an appealing option to the car. Maintaining acceptable bus speeds and reliability is a vital part of delivering sustainable growth in future. The potential role of buses in delivering mode shift from the car
The flexibility of bus service provision to respond to new and changing demand patterns and to fill gaps in connectivity means that buses can play a key role in delivering mode shift from the car to public transport. Bus services are more viable than rail where demand is widely dispersed. To challenge the dominance of the car, buses will need to offer similar journey speeds and convenience for passengers.
Analysis has been carried out to understand the potential for mode shift from car to bus. Figure 97 illustrates the scale of potential switchable trips to bus from the total ‘pool’ of private car trips undertaken daily. The greatest potential for switching to bus lies in outer London: 63 per cent of trips that would be faster by bus involve travel in outer London, with 53 per cent of the potential made entirely within outer London.
Most trips that could be made by bus are for reasons other than work and the greatest potential lies in the inter-peak period between 10am and 4pm, which accounts for around 45 per cent of switchable trips. There is greater potential in the afternoon peak (23 per cent) than the morning peak (19 per cent).
The people currently travelling by car who could feasibly use a bus instead have a higher income on average than current bus users: 35 per cent had a household income over £50,000 compared to just 19 per cent of existing bus users.
Figure 97 Characteristics of car journeys that could feasibly be made by bus
Source: City Planning Expected demand for bus services in future
The bus network will be vital for supporting growth and regeneration initiatives across London and looking to the future the service will need to continue to react quickly to meet the pace of London’s change:
- Challenge of serving London’s growing and ageing population
- Service patterns adapting to the increased densification of suburban areas
- Bus priority also keeping pace, to ensure bus services remain quick and reliable
- Continuing to improve the environmental performance of our fleet
In the future, under the Reference Case scenario that includes only funded future interventions and London Plan growth, bus journeys are predicted to continue to be affected by rising congestion on the network. Morning peak traffic congestion (delay rate per kilometre) across London is predicted to rise by between 30 to 50 per cent by 2041. Despite this and in response to population and employment growth across the capital, bus demand is still expected to grow by around 30 per cent over the same period, with the strongest growth expected in the east of London. Figure 98 illustrates where the growth in bus use is expected.
Figure 98 Expected change in daily bus use, 2015 to 2041
Source: City Planning 6.6 Crowding on public transport
Public transport crowding in London has significant impacts on individuals and the economy. Customers find travelling in crowded conditions stressful and unsatisfying. Some groups are particularly affected by crowding – those with mobility impairments for example find it difficult or impossible to travel in crowded conditions. Crowding can also lead to increased levels of aggression between passengers. It is likely that crowding increases journey times, as customers are forced to wait for a less crowded train, and that this damages real-world connectivity.
Crowding arises where the demand for travel on a particular service exceeds certain capacity thresholds – often a combination of number of seats with some allowance for standing. A standing density above two passengers per square metre in peak hours is uncomfortable for passengers and is used as an acceptable threshold for planning purposes (shown in Figure 99). Very high crowding densities on services will cause passengers to be ‘left behind’ on the platform and degrade operational performance, further reducing effective passenger capacity.
Figure 99 Crowding bands - Passengers per Square Metre
Source: City Planning
Current conditions on the rail network
Since 2000, rail capacity into London has increased substantially. Nevertheless, demand for rail services has risen faster than the increase in space offered, and as a result more people than ever are travelling in crowded conditions. Crowding particularly affects London Underground services due to its role as both a local metro and onward distributor through the Central Activities Zone. Figure 100 graphically illustrates the rising demand for London Underground services since 1999, showing how the peak period is spreading out and intensifying. Trains are considered crowded when there are more than two passengers standing per square metre, and severely crowded when there are more than four passengers standing per square metre. In the morning peak, a significant proportion of passenger journeys are made in crowded conditions:
- 70 per cent of London Underground journeys
- 41 per cent of National Rail journeys
- 42 per cent of DLR journeys
- 59 per cent of Tram journeys Figure 101 shows the current level of crowding on the rail network during the morning peak – including London Underground, National Rail, DLR and Tram services. The diagram uses coloured bands to represent increasing levels of standing per square metre, with yellow representing two passengers standing per square metre, rising through red and black with purple representing the most severe crowding. There is wide-spread crowding across the London Underground network, with most lines experiencing crowding within central London.
The longest sections suffering the most severe crowding in the peak directions are:
- Victoria Line between Victoria and Highbury and Islington;
- Northern Line Bank branch between Clapham South and Camden Town, and continuing to Archway;
- Central Line between Oxford Circus and Leyton;
- Jubilee Line between Baker Street and Canary Wharf;
- DLR - West India Quay to Canary Wharf; and
- Waterloo & City Line.
As conditions worsen, some customers will re-time their journeys to avoid the worst - it is desirable that only those who need to do so travel at peak times, and campaigns have been successful at encouraging people to shift their journey by a short time to avoid the ‘peak of the peak’. However, the agglomeration benefits of the central London economy can only be achieved if the people that need to can travel into the central area in peak hours. Therefore, achieving a good balance between peak supply and demand on the public transport network is required to support growth of London’s economy. Figure 101 Crowding on the rail network, 2015 Future conditions on the rail network
Employment growth in Central London will place significant pressure on the public transport network, and in particular on rail modes. A million additional daytime public transport trips are expected by 2041 to, from, or within central London. Eight in ten arrivals to central London in the morning peak are by rail, underground or DLR. These journeys must then disperse by foot, cycle or bus to their final destination.
Between 2015 and 2031, a significant programme of funded rail and Underground investment will be undertaken, detailed in Figures 102 and 103. Funded projects through to the early 2020s add 70 per cent extra capacity to the national rail network and 50 per cent to the LU, DLR and Tram network. In 2019 Crossrail, named the Elizabeth Line, will open in London, increasing central London rail capacity by 10 per cent. The Elizabeth Line route will run over 100km from Reading and Heathrow in the west, through new tunnels under Central London to Shenfield and Abbey Wood in the east. There will be 40 Elizabeth Line stations including 10 new stations at Paddington, Bond Street, Tottenham Court Road, Farringdon, Liverpool Street, Whitechapel, Canary Wharf, Custom House, Woolwich and Abbey Wood. The Elizabeth Line will bring an extra 1.5 million people to within 45 minutes of Central London and will link London’s key employment, leisure and business districts – Heathrow, West End, the City, Docklands – enabling further economic development.
At present, no schemes have been committed to between 2031 and 2041, so the funded programme ends in 2031. Schemes under development, such as Crossrail 2 and the Bakerloo Line Extension, are not yet funded and committed.
Figure 102 Committed capacity increases on London Underground to 2031 Where investment increases the available capacity, crowding is expected to reduce in future years – and in particular crowding will reduce following the opening of the Elizabeth line. Nevertheless, with demand increasing faster than supply, by 2041 the crowded passenger experience, defined as passenger-km exceeding a standing passenger density of two people per square metre, is expected to increase by 50 per cent on London Underground and 90 per cent on National Rail. Figure 104 summarises the proportion of passenger kilometres expected to be travelled in crowded conditions in the morning peak in 2015 to 2041, whilst Figures 105, 106 and 107 show forecast crowding by line in each of the years 2021, 2031 and 2041.
**Figure 104 Proportion of passenger kilometres travelled in crowded conditions, actual and forecast, 2015 to 2041**
| | 2015 | 2021 | 2031 | 2041 | |------------------|------|------|------|------| | London Underground| 70% | 65% | 70% | 71% | | National Rail | 41% | 51% | 32% | 40% | | DLR | 42% | 39% | 44% | 44% | | Trams | 59% | 69% | 70% | 71% | | **Total** | 52% | 56% | 44% | 46% |
Source: City Planning Figure 105 Forecast crowding on the rail network, funded programme, 2021
Source: City Planning Figure 106 Forecast crowding on the rail network, funded programme, 2031
Source: City Planning Figure 107 Forecast crowding on the rail network, funded programme, 2041
Source: City Planning In total, by 2041 around 11 million passenger kilometres will be travelled in crowded conditions – greater than 2 passengers per square metre - on the London Underground network during the morning peak period, and around 14 million passenger kilometres on the National Rail network. This represents a much higher proportion of the total kilometres travelled by London Underground, with much of the travel on the National Rail network taking place in relatively uncrowded conditions in outer London. In total, around three quarters of passenger kilometres travelled by London Underground will be in crowded conditions by 2041, compared to around half of the distance travelled by National Rail. Figures 108 to 111 show the proportion of passenger kilometres travelled in crowded conditions, by the level of crowding experienced, for 2015 to 2041, by each of the rail modes. Note that a far greater distance is travelled in total by National Rail and London Underground than by the DLR or Tram services.
**Figure 108** Proportion of passenger kilometres travelled in crowded conditions, London Underground, funded programme, 2015 to 2041
Source: City Planning Figure 109 Proportion of passenger kilometres travelled in crowded conditions, National Rail, funded programme, 2015 to 2041
Source: City Planning
Figure 110 Proportion of passenger kilometres travelled in crowded conditions, DLR, funded programme, 2015 to 2041
Source: City Planning Overall, crowding is expected to reduce by 2021, primarily due to the opening of the Elizabeth line and other new capacity, but will begin rising again by 2031 and returning to similar levels as today by 2041. Even committed new lines such as Crossrail will be crowded by 2041, particularly in the east. Without further investment beyond 2031, many areas could see severe crowding, particularly if economic and population growth again exceed expectations. This will affect connectivity and damage quality of life in London.
By 2041, only three London Underground lines will experience fewer than two people per square metre when entering Fare zone 1, with nine lines experiencing crowding of more than four people per square metre – shown in Figure 112. Furthermore, some lines will experience crowding far outside the central zone, with the Northern line northbound seeing crowding of more than four people per square metre from Balham to Bank (18 minutes travel) and the Central line crowded to a similar level from Leytonstone to St Pauls (17 minutes travel).
On National Rail, crowded travel increases on most lines; even new services such as the Elizabeth Line and Thameslink will experience crowding by 2041. By far the most crowded services will be those entering Waterloo. Crowding on Crossrail is also increasing and lines initially relieved by Crossrail, such as services to Liverpool Street, are expected to experience rapid increases in congestion by 2041. Similarly, whilst Thameslink services are initially relieved by upgrades, crowding then increases rapidly. The exception is that services to Paddington and Euston will be relieved by HS2 over this time period. Key sectors which have been identified as in need of additional capacity include:
- North East (Victoria, Piccadilly, Central and Northern lines) – South West corridors (Northern, District, and rail lines to Waterloo)
- DLR (Canary Wharf)
- Trams (east of Croydon)
In order to deliver the capacity that London will need in the 2040s we have to start planning now. Schemes such as Crossrail 2, the Bakerloo Line Extension and the South London Metro would add much needed capacity, relieve crowding on some of the busiest corridors and connect communities to support homes and jobs growth. Our analytical approach assumes that employment continues to grow and that the employment forecasts are realised. However, it is possible that London’s economic growth would in reality be constrained if the transport network was not fit for purpose, as reflected in highly crowded commuter services. 6.7 Stations
The same demographic and economic factors that lead to busier trains will result in increased passenger numbers at stations across the network, be it entries and exits to the station itself or in some cases interchange within the station. However it is not only macro-level factors which influence the numbers of people using stations, and levels of congestion. More local factors such as changes to train service patterns, housing or employment developments, modernisation of stations and more besides are potential causes of increased congestion at many of London’s 329 National Rail stations and 270 London Underground stations. The most significant challenge will arise in central London, where demand for travel in peak periods will rise substantially, placing considerable pressure on key destination and interchange stations.
Congestion within stations leads to delays as passengers move slowly through the station, are forced to wait to board trains, or are held outside the station as safety concerns force temporary closures.
As train and station crowding becomes worse, passenger journey times are increasingly affected. Figure 113 shows the top 21 locations in 2016 with the highest levels of passenger disbenefit from gateline closures. Many of the highlighted stations are National Rail interchanges where passengers are interchanging onto London Underground lines that are already crowded on their approaches to the station.
By 2041, planned station control measures may be required at 30 key stations, shown in Figure 114. This includes London Underground stations serving each of the six major National Rail termini. The closure of a London Underground station at a terminus – even for a short time – adds significant pressure to the wider network.
Figure 113 London Underground stations with greatest disbenefit from gateline closures, 2016
Source: City Planning There are fourteen central London rail termini, shown in Figure 115. Passenger flows at some of central London’s rail termini can significantly exceed those at London’s Underground stations, and as well as catering for these vast rail passenger flows, most termini also house an Underground station – which are in many cases among London’s busiest stations in their own right. As well as handling a large proportion of commuter traffic into central London, central London’s rail termini are often vitally important gateways for business travel between central London and the UK’s most economically active areas.
There are over half a million passenger travelling through the central London National Rail termini in the morning peak period (07:00-10:00) with over a quarter of a million passengers in the busiest hour (08:00-09:00). The termini are the points at which the majority of rail passengers reach central London, but although the termini are at the end of the rail line they are rarely the end of the journey; while some passengers are able to walk the last few minutes of their journey, thousands more depend on fast, reliable onward connections to reach their ultimate destination.
Most onward journeys to and from the central London termini are made either by Underground (40 per cent) or on foot (36 per cent), with the remainder made by bus (10 per cent), rail (9 per cent) and other modes. The use of different modes is closely correlated with the distances travelled, as shown in Figure 116. Figure 115 Central London Rail Termini
Source: City Planning
Figure 116 Onward Journeys by mode and distance, central London rail termini, morning peak 2011
Source: Central London Rail Termini Report (TfL 2011) With the number of rail passengers travelling into central London projected to rise considerably over the next twenty years, the need for efficient onward dispersal will become even greater. Demand increases will be driven by employment growth in central London, particularly in Opportunity Areas and Areas for Intensification, and facilitated by increased capacity on rail routes towards central London. The rail termini continue to see huge demand for office space in their vicinity, particularly within 500m of stations. Very tall buildings have been developed in the City of London and at London Bridge and are also expected in Paddington. Other mainline termini may similarly become hotspots of dense office space development. The land between King’s Cross and St Pancras International is the largest redevelopment site in central London. The redevelopment of land near railway termini is likely to add to congestion and overcrowding at these stations.
Since responsibility for operations at each of central London’s rail termini is typically shared between Network Rail, one or more Train Operating Companies, and Transport for London, these stakeholders must collaborate closely to manage large passenger flows and plan for growth. Major station works are highly disruptive for passengers and local communities and must be managed in such a way as to minimise inconvenience.
**London Underground**
On the London Underground network, rising demand is placing increasing pressure on stations. In recent years major station upgrades have been taking place at Victoria, Bond Street, Vauxhall and Tottenham Court Road. Work on a major upgrade has commenced at Bank and is due to complete in 2021. London Underground’s Future Station Capacity Programme (FSCP) builds off of these upgrades and responds to rising passenger demand and forecast congestion at key stations across the network. By prioritising stations and developing designs for capacity upgrades, it seeks to support growth in demand, reduce in-station journey times, enhance the benefits of line upgrades such as on the Northern and Piccadilly lines, improve interchange and accessibility including step-free access, optimise third-party engagement and funding, and ensure stations support strategic growth in employment and housing. Other considerations such as ensuring stations can be safely evacuated in the event of a fire or other major incident also need to be addressed.
Holborn and Camden Town have been identified as the most urgent stations to upgrade in the future, with funding allocated to them in TfL’s current business plan. These stations both regularly suffer overcrowding, with Camden Town already having to operate a one-way system on Saturday and as exit-only on Sunday afternoons to control crowding. As demand is expected to grow by as much as 50 per cent by the early 2030s, such measures may need to extend to other times during the week. At Holborn, large queues regularly build to enter the station in the evening peak with control measures being implemented. This is to prevent overcrowding inside the station which is triggered by entry, exit and interchange customers having to pass through the constrained space at the bottom of the main escalators. Interchange flows at Holborn are continuing to grow. The congestion will get increasingly severe with evening peak demand at Holborn projected to increase by 30 per cent by 2031. Although the need for interventions is largest at network-critical stations, other stations will also require interventions to address the impacts of new development and to take advantage of opportunities with third-party developers. By working with developers and local authorities, significant capacity and accessibility improvements can be delivered to enable growth while lowering costs for TfL. Such opportunities are currently being pursued at Finsbury Park, Bromley-by-Bow and Tottenham Hale, and in the near future at stations such as South Kensington, Paddington (Bakerloo), Elephant & Castle (Northern) and Walthamstow Central.
Those stations in most need of upgrade works, either due to current conditions or because there is likely to be particularly high growth in the vicinity, have been identified, set out in Figure 117 below. This table also includes stations, marked with asterisks, where upgrades are planned or may need to take place earlier than 2041.
**Figure 117 London Underground stations in need of upgrade works**
| Major interchanges with Network Rail | Critical central London interchanges | Key interchanges or local areas with high economic activity | Potential with complementary development | |-------------------------------------|-------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------| | Opportunity to develop collaborative masterplans for mutual benefit | Network-critical stations where interchange routes may experience severe congestion | Stations where interchange between modes or access to increasing number of jobs creates congestion | May be prioritised when complementary developments are identified |
| Embankment | Camden Town\* | Baker Street | Aldgate | |------------|--------------|--------------|---------| | Euston\* | Green Park | Brixton | Canada Water | | Euston Square\* | Holborn\* | Elephant & Castle (Northern)\* | Chancery Lane | | Liverpool Street | Leicester Square | London Bridge\* | Covent Garden | | Stratford\* | Oxford Circus\* | Moorgate\* | Edgware Road (Circle) | | Waterloo | Piccadilly Circus | Old Street\* | High Street Kensington | | | | Paddington (Bakerloo)\* | St. James’s Park | | | | Russell Square | St. Paul’s | | | | South Kensington\* | | | | | Walthamstow Central\* | | | | | Warren Street | |
Source: London Underground Note: stations marked with asterisks are where upgrades are planned or may need to take place earlier than 2041 6.8 Passenger safety on the public transport network
Londoners rightly expect their public transport services to be operated safely and to be managed and policed to ensure their personal security. After many years of safe operation, there was a major tram derailment at Sandilands Junction in November 2016 in which seven people lost their lives and over 50 people were injured. This tragedy serves as a reminder that safety is paramount.
Figures 118 and 119 show the trend in passenger injuries and fatalities on the principal public transport networks up to 2015/16. Note that this data is for the financial year ending March 2016 and thus does not include the Sandilands incident. In summary, the data shows that:
- On the Underground during 2015/16 there were 93 passenger injuries and three fatalities. This was slightly higher than the previous year, but it should be noted that the statistical definitions of this series changed in 2014/15.
- In 2015, 71 bus or coach occupants were injured in London, with one fatality. These casualty numbers exclude pedestrian and other vehicle users who might have been injured in collisions involving buses or coaches – these are included in the statistics described in chapter 3 of this report. There has been a consistent trend of improvement in bus or coach passenger injuries over the last decade.
These trends should also be evaluated in the context of rising public transport patronage in London. The challenge remains to continue to improve passenger safety despite growing passenger volumes.
Figure 118 Number of people killed or seriously injured while travelling on London Underground, 1994 to 2016
Source: TfL Surface Transport Figure 119 Number of bus or coach occupants killed or seriously injured in London, 2000 to 2015
Source: TfL Surface Transport 6.9 River services
Over the last ten years, river patronage has doubled (see Figure 120) with over 10.5 million people travelling on the river in 2016/17. TfL has worked in partnership with operators and developers to expand existing piers and services, improve integration with walking, cycling and public transport (e.g. rollout of contactless payment readers) and to introduce new developer led piers such as Plantation Wharf which have helped increase patronage. Between 2017 and 2021, up to seven new developer led piers including at Battersea and Royal Wharf will be introduced along the Thames and further opportunities are being investigated.
The Port of London Authority (PLA) Thames Vision has set a target to double annual river patronage to 20 million and underlying intra-port freight carried by water to over four million tonnes by 2035. To meet these targets, it will be necessary to:
- Maximise the finite space available on the river to safely carry both passengers and goods;
- Work with developers and commercial partners to introduce new and expand existing pier infrastructure, particularly in east London, at minimal cost to TfL;
- Improve visibility of river services and further integrate the river with walking, cycling and other public transport modes;
- Identify measures (e.g. engine filters) to minimise the impact of river services on the environment; and
- Address a skills shortage on the Thames, for example through the Thames Skills Academy.
Figure 120 River patronage growth, annual passenger numbers, 2006/07-2016/17
Source: TfL Surface Transport 6.10 Taxis and private hire vehicles
TfL is responsible for licensing taxi (black cab) and private hire services in London. The licensing of private hire operators started in 2001, with private hire driver and vehicle licensing following in 2003 and 2004 respectively. Prior to 2001 there was no regulation of private hire services in the capital.
The number of licensed taxi drivers and taxi vehicles has remained fairly constant since 2001 but in the past few years there has been a significant increase in the number of licensed private hire drivers and vehicles, shown in Figure 121. Since 2008/09, the number of private hire vehicles has increased by 58 per cent and the number of drivers by 81 per cent. At the same time the number of licensed private hire operators has decreased.
Figure 121 Recent trend of licensed London taxis and private hire vehicles
Monitoring the size of the taxi and private hire markets is difficult as operators and drivers are not required to provide journey information to TfL and there is no equivalent to the data received for bus and Tube journeys. Furthermore, private hire covers a wide range of different services. Research is underway to establish the size of the taxi, minicab and chauffeur markets and changes to these markets.
Separately, TfL now requires all licensed private hire operators to submit details of their booked journeys and the licensed drivers working for them on a weekly basis. This information provides a better understanding of the profile of the private hire industry whilst also assisting compliance and enforcement activity (for example monitoring drivers who may be working when unlicensed). Impact of app-based services
The introduction of apps which enable users to book a taxi or private hire vehicle (PHV) has had a major impact on both markets. An increasing number of drivers are using apps and the usage by passengers has grown significantly. Figure 122 shows the change in use of apps by taxi drivers between 2014/15 and 2016/17 and Figure 123 shows the use of apps by private hire drivers over the same period.
Figure 122 Change in use of apps by taxi drivers and length of time app used for, 2014/15 to 2016/17
Source: TfL Surface Transport
Figure 123 Change in use of apps by private hire drivers, 2014/15 to 2016/17
Source: TfL Surface Transport Research carried out with users in 2014, 2015 and 2016 showed that amongst minicab users the number who had used an app to book their last minicab journey had risen from 17 per cent to 42 per cent, shown in Figure 124.
**Figure 124 Change in use of apps by minicab passengers, 2014 to 2016**
Source: TfL Surface Transport
There is increasing interest in the provision of ridesharing services. In 2016, just under a fifth of taxi and minicabs users had used a ridesharing service in London. While ridesharing presents opportunities there are also some potential risks including to passenger safety.
**Challenges and opportunities for taxi and private hire services**
Challenges and opportunities include:
- Ensuring that there is fair competition between the taxi and private hire markets and that services represent good value for money for passengers;
- Managing the increase in private hire driver and vehicle numbers and the impact on congestion, air quality and compliance;
- Phasing out diesel taxis and ensuring new vehicles are zero emission capable;
- Ensuring that the supply of taxi or private hire services meets customer needs;
- Ensuring that taxi ranks and space for taxis and private hire vehicles to pick up and drop off passengers are provided in suitable locations;
- Providing training to drivers to improve the customer experience, help minimise road danger and improve services for disabled passengers;
- Ensuring drivers are paid a fair wage and are not exploited; and
- Reviewing legislation to reflect the changing nature of the taxi and private hire market, including the need to bring pedicabs within the licensing framework. 6.11 Coach travel
14 million passengers a year travel by coach in and out of Victoria Coach Station, to 1,200 destinations in the UK and abroad. Coaches provide national and international connectivity at a low cost for many groups including commuters, students, people visiting family and friends, and holiday-makers. The greatest inbound flows are seen on the M1 and M4, with the M11 and M40 also key routes.
Victoria Coach Station currently operates at or close to capacity and is in need of substantial refurbishment. Major redevelopment in Victoria will place increased pressure on the road network, further damaging operations. Further, Grosvenor Estates are keen to redevelop the site and it is an identified construction site for Crossrail 2.
An assessment of policy and demand for coach services has demonstrated that a central hub in zone 1 needs to be maintained, with supporting hubs around London, and a feasibility study is underway looking at a new primary hub in the inner/central/west London area, which has land available and offers good road and onward transport links. Further work is also underway to clarify the role of coaches in London’s transport offering, and to consider what role TfL should play in their provision. 6.12 Summary: a good public transport experience
London has become more unaffordable as housing and travel costs have risen faster than incomes
Whilst the economy of London has grown, not all Londoners have shared in the benefits. London is one of the most expensive places to live in the world and yet more than a fifth of working Londoners do not receive the London Living Wage. In the early years of TfL, average earnings rose faster than fares, particularly bus fares which were frozen or reduced each year between 2005 and 2008. However, between 2008 and 2015, single Tube and bus fares increased by around 60 per cent. While this allowed for significant investment in transport networks, those on the minimum wage saw their pay rise just 17 per cent, making travel costs a larger proportion of their spending. The Mayor has frozen fares to make travel more affordable. Travel costs becoming unaffordable could make it harder for Londoners to make the journeys they need and want to by public transport.
A good customer experience means consistently getting the basics right and being innovative
A good customer experience means consistently getting the basics right and being innovative. Customers should be able to trust their transport providers to provide a good experience across the network, but overstretched services may struggle to deliver what customers want. Customers will expect services to respond to emerging technology and reflect cultural change - as expectations rise, it will become increasingly difficult to deliver the basics consistently in a crowded and congested environment. In particular, customers expect and deserve a consistent experience and yet satisfaction varies considerably between different rail operators, with customers on Southern and Thameslink services the least satisfied.
An inclusive, accessible, affordable transport network benefits all Londoners. But despite significant improvements, 41 per cent of the public transport network is still not accessible
Journey times are longer on the step-free network and a number of barriers to travel remain. In particular, whilst everyone finds travelling on crowded services unpleasant, for those with accessibility needs crowded services can act as a total barrier to travel. With a fast growing population with accessibility needs - 1.8 million people by 2041 - and more intensely crowded rail services, accessibility risks becoming a more acute challenge as time moves on.
Buses are a space-efficient and affordable mode of transport but falling speeds worsen the experience for users
London’s bus services provide the most extensive public transport network in the capital, offering low cost, accessible travel across London’s residential outer areas as well as a dense network of services in inner and central London. Investment in new services, increased frequencies, bus priority and improved customer experience meant that demand for bus travel grew by 71 per cent between 2000 and 2015 and 3.9 million bus journeys are made in London every day. However, passenger volumes have started to fall in recent years, largely as result of slowing bus speeds and also reflecting changes to travel patterns. It is vital that the huge achievements of the past 15 years are not lost and London does not see a return to car travel. In fact, there is enormous potential to deliver mode shift from car to bus, with around three million journeys that could feasibly be made by bus. Modelling suggests that increasing bus connectivity in outer London in particular could deliver this mode shift; emerging forms of demand responsive bus services could provide a cost effective solution in some cases. To realise this potential, buses will need to provide connectivity and convenience to compete with the car, and bus speeds will need to improve once again.
**Despite tube and rail upgrades and the opening of the Elizabeth line, demand will increase faster than supply by 2041, exacerbating crowding**
In the next five years, London will experience the opening of the first entirely new rail line in a generation and the completion of significant upgrades to the London Underground network. As a result, by 2021, the rail network will be less crowded on average than today, although many lines will still experience very crowded trains. But by 2031, the funded programme will have drawn to a close, and population growth will be placing renewed pressure on the rail network. By 2041, demand will have outstripped supply and in the absence of new rail capacity we can expect to see severe crowding across almost all of the Tube and rail network as it approaches central London, and spreading much further in many cases. Crowding will increase by 50 per cent on London Underground and 90 per cent on national rail services by 2041.
**Crowding in stations causes delays and frustration and will become more common as London grows**
The same demographic and economic factors that lead to busier trains will result in increased passenger numbers at stations across the network. The most significant challenge will arise in central London, where demand for travel at peak periods will rise substantially, placing pressure on key destination stations and interchanges. Congestion within stations leads to delays as passengers move slowly through the station, are forced to wait to board trains, or are held outside the station as safety concerns force temporary closures. By 2041, planned station control measures may be required at 30 key stations, including London Underground stations serving each of the six major National Rail termini. The closure of a London Underground station at a terminus, even for a short time, adds significant pressure to the wider network.
**Passenger safety should always be a top priority**
In recent years, the number of people killed or seriously injured on the London Underground has remained broadly stable, set against growing passenger numbers, and the safety of bus and coach passengers has improved considerably. After many years of safe operation, there was a major tram derailment at Sandilands Junction in November 2016 in which seven people lost their lives and over 50 people were injured. This tragedy serves as a reminder that safety is paramount and that it is vital to work to continuously improve passenger safety despite growing demand for services. The Thames Vision sets a goal of doubling river patronage
Over the last ten years, river patronage has doubled with over 10.5 million people travelling on the river in 2016/17 and the Port of London Authority (PLA) Thames Vision has set a target to double annual river patronage to 20 million and underlying intra-port freight carried by water to over four million tonnes by 2035.
In recent years, there has been an unprecedented rise in the number of licensed private hire drivers and vehicles, leading to concerns around congestion, air quality and compliance
Whilst the number of licensed taxis and licensed taxi drivers in London has remained stable for many years, the number of private hire vehicles (PHVs) has increased by 58 per cent since 2008/09 with the number of licensed drivers increasing by 81 per cent over the same period.
Coaches provide affordable long distance transport options; Victoria Coach Station currently operates at or close to capacity and is in need of substantial refurbishment.
Coaches provide affordable long distance transport options; however, TfL does not operate services directly but has historically provided the London terminus at Victoria Coach Station. 14 million passengers a year travel by coach in and out of Victoria Coach Station, to 1,200 destinations in the UK and abroad. A study has concluded that a central hub in zone 1 needs to be maintained, with supporting hubs around London. The role that the public sector should play in future coach provision is yet to be decided. 7 New Homes and Jobs
The number of people living in London is rising fast, with the population expected to reach 10.5 million by 2041, accompanied by 6.8 million jobs. As described in the previous chapters, without further action the growth in travel demand will lead to overcrowded public transport services, congested and traffic clogged streets, and poor air quality. We also face a public health crisis, and the transport network can play a vital role in helping people be more active. Fundamentally, people will choose the easiest and most convenient travel options; it is therefore vital that the design of new developments makes travelling sustainably the best choice. This chapter describes the role of transport in unlocking development and explores the relationship between different factors and sustainable travel choices.
New Homes and Jobs: key findings
- London accounts for one fifth of the UK economy and holds a unique role as an internationally competitive centre for global business services. Central London accommodates 30 per cent of London’s jobs in just 2 per cent of its area.
- All of London’s key employment centres are in locations which can be reached by more than two million people within 45 minutes and this is where the most growth is expected, with three quarters of a million additional people expected to be working in central London and the Isle of Dogs by 2041. Transport capacity constraints can limit this connectivity and may lead to lost economic potential if crowding starts to deter people from working in the centre.
- The ‘effective connectivity’ of the transport system will be insufficient to meet London’s labour supply requirements from the early 2030s as demand starts to outstrip supply. New rail capacity will be required to meet this demand and ensure London’s economy can continue to thrive.
- Beyond the centre, travel is more car dependent but town centres could become sustainable travel hubs. Currently, Londoners make 1.5 million car trips every day to or from one of London’s town centres.
- 50,000 new homes are needed every year, equivalent to a new home every 11 minutes, 24 hours a day for the next 25 years, but only around half this have been delivered in recent years.
- A constrained housing supply means people are paying more to live in worse conditions. In the long term, a constrained housing market will deter people from living and working in London and threaten economic growth.
- Transport has a key role in unlocking housing development – homes in the best connected areas command a price premium and a disproportionate amount of development has taken place in very well connected areas.
- Conversely, many of the areas with the greatest capacity for development have poor transport connectivity and this has directly limited private sector investment in housing. • Investing in new public transport capacity could unlock the delivery of hundreds of thousands of homes that may not otherwise come forward for development. TfL is the owner of 5,700 acres of public land in London and sites have been identified that could potentially deliver 10,000 homes over the next five years.
• Where people live to a large extent determines their travel patterns: car ownership and use is higher in places where access to jobs, shops and services depends on the car. People living in more densely populated areas, with good access to town centres and public transport services, are more likely to travel by public transport, cycling and walking and less likely to travel by car.
• Better cycling facilities, such as safe and appealing routes, and secure parking at stations, can expand the effective connectivity provided by the public transport network as people living further away can access rail services within the same amount of time.
• In outer London particularly, car ownership levels are higher where there is better parking provision, based on the assumption that off-street parking is better than on-street, and that unpermitted parking is better than permitted. In inner London, there is some evidence that the cost of parking is deterring people from owning and running a car.
• Research conducted with residents of new developments found that for all groups and in all areas residents of developments with more parking available owned more cars than people living in developments with less parking.
• In summary, it is clear that the situation and design of new housing will determine the travel patterns of its residents. Higher density, well connected housing, offering a good quality environment for walking and cycling, and limited parking provision, will encourage people to travel sustainably. Equally, in order to prevent rising car travel, new employment should be well connected by public transport and active modes to the potential workforce, with limited parking, to deter commuting by car. 7.1 Unlocking new jobs
This section describes the challenges and opportunities facing London’s economy and the role of transport in delivering economic growth.
London’s economy and the role of transport
London is vital to economic growth across the UK – it is the most productive region and the UK’s only global centre. London’s position as an internationally competitive centre for global business services brings trade not just to London but to the UK as a whole. In 2014, London accounted for around 23 per cent of the UK’s economic output, a rise from around 19 per cent in 1997. 45 per cent of GVA was generated in just six central Boroughs, making this the most productive part of the UK. It hosts a cluster of globally competitive sectors in its centre, which accommodates over 30 per cent of the city’s jobs and 60 per cent of office jobs in just 2 per cent of its area. There is considerable scope to further increase employment density in London’s global employment core but this will depend on expanding the available labour supply.
Figure 125 shows the clear relationship between employment density and productivity in the 100 largest employment centres, with the exceptionally high density City of London and Tower Hamlets (containing Canary Wharf) the most productive zones by quite some way. An important economic challenge facing London over the next few decades is to maintain and extend this role.
Figure 125 The relationship between employment density and productivity in the 100 largest employment centres
Source: Volterra Ready access to a very large population catchment, supplied by the rail network, is fundamental to London’s ability to act as a global employment centre. Businesses depend on the system being able to deliver people reliably from where they live to where they work at times they are prepared to travel. This means that in addition to the connectivity of the transport system, its capacity and performance are critical. These factors together determine its ‘effective connectivity’. Figure 126 shows the working age population able to access each zone within 45 minutes travel time. By 2041, with the funded programme, 7.6 million working age people will be able to access central London in 45 minutes travel time. All of London’s key employment centres are in locations which can be reached by at least two million people within 45 minutes. This is also where the most growth is expected, with three quarters of a million additional people expected to be working in central London and the Isle of Dogs by 2041. Eight in ten of those working in central London arrive by rail and so this growth will depend on the effective connectivity provided by a high capacity radial rail network.
**Figure 126 Travel time to the Central Activities Zone, funded programme, 2041**
Source: TfL City Planning Impact of public transport crowding on economic growth
Transport capacity constraints can limit the effective connectivity of the transport system, and will constrain growth in labour supply if not addressed. Persistent levels of excessive crowding on the transport system and associated impacts on system performance can be seen as a ‘warning sign’ that labour supply constraints are starting to emerge. The impacts may be felt before the point is reached at which passengers cannot physically board trains as some travel will be deterred by the prospect of severe overcrowding. They are also likely to be accompanied by deteriorating system performance.
If experienced on a daily basis this will reduce some people’s willingness to commute resulting in them withdrawing from labour markets in which they would otherwise be willing to participate. If the situation is sufficiently widespread it will impact on people’s perception of the quality of life available in the city and fewer people willing to live and work in it, reducing the effective supply of labour that is available. As labour supply becomes constrained, employers’ costs will increase as they have to pay higher wages and they will become less competitive. Eventually the city will become less attractive as a business location and agglomeration benefits will decrease leading to a further loss of competitiveness and so on.
If the central London economy was to be constrained as a result of transport problems, estimates suggest that this could result in an annual loss to national output of approximately £70 billion or 5.4 per cent of GDP.
The rail capacity challenge to 2041 and need for new rail capacity
As outlined earlier in this report, with currently committed and planned investment the ‘effective connectivity’ of the transport system will be insufficient to meet London’s labour supply requirements from the early 2030s as demand starts to outstrip supply.
There is strong evidence that the heart of the transport network will be severely constrained by the early 2030s. The central area of the Underground network within the Circle Line, together with links to Canary Wharf, Stratford and Battersea, represent the heart of the network critical to delivering the ‘hyper-connectivity’ enabling key employment centres to share a vast shared labour market. This part of the network offers a dense array of interchange possibilities between Underground lines and also with the ring of national rail stations that enables dispersal of arriving national rail commuters to their employment locations. The greatest challenges on the London Underground network will arise on:
- the Victoria line northbound, north of Victoria; and southbound, south of Finsbury Park;
- the Northern Line northbound and southbound on both the Charing Cross and Bank branches (inbound from Waterloo, London Bridge, Euston and King’s Cross St Pancras);
- the Jubilee Line eastbound, east of Waterloo; and
- the Waterloo and City line northbound.
Furthermore, the radial rail network is expected to experience severe crowding, with particular capacity challenges in the following locations:
- North east (Victoria, Piccadilly, Central and Northern lines) to south west (Northern, District and rail lines to Waterloo) corridor;
- DLR (Canary Wharf); and
- Trams east of Croydon.
The solution is for additional capacity to be created through appropriate investment in the transport system. The Jubilee Line Extension demonstrates the benefits of investing in new rail capacity. The line has enabled large scale development in a series of locations along its route, most notably at Canary Wharf, which now accommodates over 100,000 high value jobs. This is only possible because of the line’s function (along with the DLR and Crossrail from 2019) in integrating the area into the wider transport network that serves Central London. Canary Wharf is therefore able to draw on a largely similar labour pool to the City of London and the rest of Central London.
**Role of town centres**
Beyond the centre, travel is more car dependent but town centres could become sustainable travel hubs. London contains twelve metropolitan town centres – many similar in size to the centres of major cities across the UK – as well as 35 major centres and 147 district centres. These are shown in Figure 127. At least four in ten journeys made by London residents start or end in a town centre, primarily for shopping but also to work, access services and for leisure purposes. On an average day, London residents make 1.5 million car trips to a town centre.
As our shopping habits change, the role of town centres is changing accordingly. Retail is consolidating in larger centres, meaning that smaller centres are becoming less viable over time. In general, we can see that the denser the area in 2011 in terms of retail units, the greater the increase in density since. Conversely, town centres have an increasing role as leisure destinations and residential locations, resulting in more evening travel. Town centres typically also act as transport hubs, with larger town centres all served by Tube or rail services and multiple bus routes. Whilst London residents are less likely to drive to town centres than other destinations, nevertheless, three in ten trips to a town centre is made by car. Non-Londoners also visit London’s town centres, often by car, so this is likely to underestimate the overall car mode share. Research has found that people accessing town centres by active modes and bus spend more per month than car users. The mode share of trips to town centres by London residents is shown in Figure 128. Figure 128 Mode share of trips to town centres, London residents
Source: TfL City Planning 7.2 Unlocking new homes
This section describes the challenges and opportunities facing housing in London and the role of transport in unlocking the development of new homes.
London’s housing challenge
Building enough new homes and catering to the needs of all Londoners is extremely challenging. To accommodate population growth and tackle the existing housing shortage, 50,000 new homes are needed every year. This is equivalent to a new home every 11 minutes, 24 hours a day for the next 25 years. Some 270,000 homes in London have been granted planning permission but have not yet been built - last year alone nearly 70,000 new homes were approved - and only around half the homes that Londoners need have actually been delivered in recent years. Figure 129 shows the profile of housing delivery over the past 150 years. This shows that London has only once and for a very short period seen the levels of housebuilding now required – in the early 1930s.
Figure 129 New homes built in Greater London, 1871 to 2014
A shortage of housing raises living costs and reduces quality of life, with people having to live in overcrowded or unsuitable homes, far from home, friends and family. Overcrowding is rising in London, but falling nationally. The biggest supply gap is in the lower market value (less than £450 per square foot), with the least gap in the upper mainstream market (£700-1,000 per square foot). 90 per cent of new residential units in London are flats.
As well as damaging quality of life and increasing the cost of living, housing supply constraints can deter people from living and working in London, meaning a constrained housing supply also signifies lost economic potential. Three quarters of businesses consider housing a threat to the economy.
Analysis suggests that if London’s housing needs were not met, the consequences might be:
- Prices rise;
- Some people who would have lived in London live elsewhere;
- Housing is only delivered in places with the highest land values and elsewhere, properties are sub-divided;
- People are forced to live further away from where they work and in areas with poorer transport accessibility; and
- Overcrowding rises and the amount of space per person falls.
The role of transport in unlocking housing
The role of transport in unlocking housing development is multi-faceted:
- Unlocking new development opportunities through investment in new rail infrastructure or substantial improvements to current services, for example increasing service frequency and quality on the National Rail network.
- Maximising the impact of planned new infrastructure and upgrades through complementary investment to create high quality places.
- TfL is a major land owner and could also partner with developers to bring forward National Rail sites for housing.
Transport brings about investment in housing both by improving the viability of developments and creating new markets. Homes in the best connected areas command a price premium - currently 2.5 per cent for Crossrail 1 above surrounding areas - and a disproportionate amount of development has taken place in very well connected areas. Since 2005 over half of residential development has come forward in areas of PTAL 4 and above, shown in Figure 130. It is estimated that an additional 1,000 new homes delivers 250 new jobs created, with access to central London and good rail services a key determinant. Research by Nationwide found that London homebuyers are willing to pay a £42,000 premium for a property 500m from the nearest station, compared to a similar one 1.5km away, shown in Figure 131. Better railways are fundamental to building more homes and the greatest benefits are accrued where infrastructure provides new or significantly enhanced rail connectivity to central London.
**Figure 131 Property price premium compared to property located 1,500m from a station**
Source: Nationwide Over recent years, a disproportionate amount of population growth has taken place in inner London, as that area densified through new development and also the splitting of houses into flats. Whilst further potential for densification remains, there are limits to the residential capacity of the areas that are well connected by public transport.
Lack of transport provision can damage the viability of sites for development. Opportunity Areas are London’s largest reservoir of brownfield land, but many of the areas with the greatest capacity for development have poor transport connectivity and this has directly limited private sector investment in housing. Figure 132 shows Employment Zones, Areas for Intensification and Housing Zones mapped alongside public transport access levels – showing the overlap between development opportunities and poor connectivity, particularly in the Upper Lea Valley.
**Figure 132 Comparison of growth areas and public transport access**
Beyond these growth areas, densification and development is constrained in parts of London with poorer access to the rail network, and in particular in South London where the connectivity provided by the National Rail Network is considerably poorer than in other regions. Figure 133 maps all the stations offering a high frequency service – the paucity of coverage in South London is clearly evident. ‘Metro-isation’ of the service to enhance frequency and therefore capacity, by upgrading signalling, track and stations, has the potential to unlock new homes and increase densification of the existing housing stock.
**Figure 133 High frequency stations and buffer areas of 800m**
Investing in new public transport capacity could unlock the delivery of thousands of homes that may not otherwise come forward for development. For example:
- Crossrail 2 will support 200,000 new homes and 200,000 jobs along its route. Early upgrades of the West Anglia Main Line in advance of Crossrail 2 could accelerate the delivery of this growth.
- The Bakerloo Line extension will enable more than 25,000 new homes and 5,000 jobs in the Old Kent Road Opportunity Area.
- An extension of the DLR to Thamesmead could enable up to 17,000 new homes and around 3,000 new jobs.
- TfL’s planned extension of the London Overground to Barking Riverside will support the delivery of 11,000 new homes that would otherwise not have been viable. An extension of the Elizabeth line could support the delivery of a further 55,000 homes and 50,000 jobs in Bexley and north Kent. A Tram extension to Sutton could support the delivery of at least 10,000 new homes and improve public transport accessibility to Sutton town centre and St Helier Hospital.
TfL is the owner of 5,700 acres of public land in London and sites have been identified that could potentially deliver 10,000 homes over the next five years. 7.3 Relationship between housing density and sustainable travel
Where you live to a large extent determines your travel choices. Where people live in dense communities, with shops and services within an easily walkable distance, they are more likely to choose to walk, cycle and use public transport and less likely to own a car. Figure 134 shows the relationship between population density and the share of journeys to work made by car – it is absolutely clear that as population density rises, the proportion of people driving to work falls, so that in the most densely populated areas less than 10 per cent of people travel to work by car, compared to more than 70 per cent in the least densely populated areas.
Figure 134 Car mode share for travel to work by population density, London residents 2011
Source: City Planning
Higher densities can influence travel in a number of ways: people living in densely populated areas typically need to travel shorter distances to access opportunities and services; densely populated areas tend to be better connected by public transport, particularly buses; and the car is less attractive due to increased competition for road space and parking. As London’s population has grown, population densities have increased. Population growth has disproportionately taken place in inner London, so that a higher proportion of the population now lives in more densely populated areas. This has contributed to the rise in sustainable travel in recent years.
Figure 135 highlights the relationship between density and car mode share – as density rises (moving left to right on the X axis), the car mode share (shown in yellow) falls and the sustainable mode share (shown in green and blue) rises. The stacked bars show the proportion of London’s population living at each level of population density. This shows that the highest proportion of Londoners live in areas with between 20 and 100 people per hectare, mostly in outer London, where the car mode share averages between 50 and 30 per cent. Inner London is more densely populated and has a higher sustainable mode share. As London’s population continues to grow, density across the city will increase. Areas that have a population density of more than 100 residents per hectare have an average car mode share of 25 per cent or less. The proportion of the population living in areas at least as densely populated as this is projected to increase from around 30 per cent at the time of the 2011 Census to over 40 per cent in 2041 (see Figure 136). Nevertheless, the majority of the population is still expected to live in places with fewer than 100 residents per hectare, where the car accounts for at least 30 per cent of all trips, rising to nearly 60 per cent of trips made by residents of the least densely populated parts of London. Rising population densities are likely to lead to falling car travel; as shown in Figure 137, car travel has fallen the most where there have been the greatest increases in population density. Figure 136 Proportion of population by density of local area, actual and forecast, 2011 and 2041
Source: City Planning
Figure 137 Change in mode share by density of local area, 2001 to 2011
Source: City Planning One reason that people are more likely to travel sustainably when they live in more densely populated areas is that it is easier for them to access shops and services on foot or by travelling a short distance. As evidence of this, there is a strong correlation between the use of sustainable modes and the distance people live from a town centre, so that people who live close to a town centre are more likely to travel by public transport, walking and cycling than those who live further away. Figure 138 illustrates this relationship.
**Figure 138** Average mode share for all journeys by proximity to a town centre, London residents 2011
Source: City Planning 7.4 Relationship between public transport connectivity and sustainable travel
Public transport connectivity of workplaces
People are more likely to drive and less likely to use public transport if their place of work is located in an area:
- with low PT provision
- with low employment density
- further from Central London
- further from rail stations
- further from town centres
The average distance travelled to commute is 8km, compared to 5.5km for journeys for other purposes. As a result, just 19 per cent of commute journeys are walked, with the vast majority made by public transport or car.
Furthermore, people are more likely to drive for all journey purposes in areas where a high proportion of jobs can only be accessed by car than in areas where jobs can be easily accessed by public transport, shown in Figure 139. This suggests that once a car oriented pattern is established, in this case due to the need to drive to work, people are more likely to use the car for other journey purposes as well, highlighting the importance of locating employment growth in areas accessible by public transport and limiting the need to drive to work.
Figure 139 Average mode share for all journeys by the proportion of the total jobs available to residents of that area which are only accessible by car, London residents 2011
Source: City Planning Public transport connectivity of residential areas
Car ownership is higher in parts of London with less access to public transport and lower where public transport options are very good – shown in Figure 140. Likewise, the share of journeys made by car is higher in areas with less good access to public transport. Public transport access level and population density have a compounding impact, so that car ownership is highest in parts of London with the lowest density population and the least good access to public transport – shown in Figure 141.
Figure 140 Household car ownership by Public Transport Access Level (PTAL), London residents 2011
| Public Transport Access Level | % of households that own at least one vehicle | |------------------------------|---------------------------------------------| | 0 – 1 (least good) | 75% | | 2 | 67% | | 3-4 | 53% | | 5-6 (best) | 38% |
Source: City Planning
Figure 141 Household car ownership by Public Transport Access Level (PTAL) and population density, London residents 2011
Source: City Planning
So there is a clear link between the necessity of owning a car and levels of car ownership. This is somewhat a cyclical relationship – in some locations, the options available make car ownership more or less appealing, and for some people, location will be more or less appealing as a place to live based upon the transport choices available. So for some, the ability to live without a car will be appealing aspects of an area, whilst for others, the availability of car parking and low congestion is attractive when choosing somewhere to live.
As Figure 142 indicates, more than 50 per cent of London’s population live in areas of PTAL 2 or less and are therefore likely to be more car dependent. For some, the choice to live in an area with less good access to public transport will have been driven by the affordability of homes. Access to a tube station can increase property prices by 8 per cent. This means that less affluent people might not be able to afford areas that are well connected by public transport and might find it more difficult to reduce their dependency on a car.
Looking to the future, unless further action is taken, the distribution of London’s population by their access to public transport is not expected to change dramatically. More than half of London’s population will continue living in PTAL 2, and around 14 per cent in the areas with the best public transport, PTAL areas 6a and 6b.
**Figure 142** Average mode share for all journeys by Public Transport Access Level, London residents, 2011
Public Transport Access Levels are calculated based upon the time it would take to walk to public transport services. With better cycling facilities – safe and appealing routes, and safe and secure parking at stations – the effective connectivity provided by the public transport network is expanded as people living further away can access rail services within the same amount of time. Figure 143 illustrates the improvement to public transport accessibility that could be delivered by facilitating cycling. As well as benefitting existing residents, investing in cycling to rail stations could help unlock higher density development.
**Figure 143** Example improvement in public transport accessibility delivered by facilitating cycling to rail stations
Source: City Planning 7.5 Relationship between parking and sustainable travel
There are 2.6 million cars registered in London and more than half of London households have at least one car. Londoners are more likely to own a car if they live in Outer London, live in an area with poor access to public transport, have a higher income, have a child in the house, and are of Western European nationality. There is a strong positive relationship between household car ownership and average car trip rate by borough. If people own a car they tend to use it.
London is less car dependent compared to other cities partly because of the increasing costs and inconvenience of car use. The difficulty in finding parking spaces, the cost of parking and the cost of driving within the Congestion Charging Zone have all made car travel comparatively less attractive. In addition, traffic congestion has increased the time and stress of travelling by car and made predicting journey times more difficult. The key reasons London households choose not to own a car are:
- the costs of owning and running a car – around a quarter of those without a car say that they would buy one if they could afford to;
- the stress of owning and driving a car in London; and
- a car is unnecessary given the proximity of local services and the availability of public transport.
One key factor is the availability and cost of residential parking. The majority (59 per cent) of vehicles across Greater London are kept in some form of off-street parking overnight, 24 per cent are parked on street without a permit and 16 per cent are parked on-street with a residents’ permit. The quality of parking varies greatly by region - less than 30 per cent of vehicles in inner London are parked off-street, compared to 65 per cent of outer London vehicles. Overall, there is some evidence that quality of parking available influences the level of car ownership, particularly in Outer London. Figure 144 demonstrates that across Greater London car ownership levels are higher where there is better parking provision (this is based on the assumption that off-street parking is better than on-street, and that unpermitted parking is better than permitted). Research conducted with London residents in 2013 found that the cost of car parking is substantially more in inner London, at almost £240 per year, compared to an average of just under £85 for outer London households, and less than £20 for residents of external boroughs within the M25. Whilst very few of those surveyed said that a lack of parking prevented them from owning a car, the cost of buying and running a car was one of the main reasons inner Londoners chose not to own a car – and the cost of parking both at home and at likely destinations could reasonably be supposed to contribute to this.
Research conducted with residents of new developments found that for all groups, and in all areas, people living in developments with more parking available had higher levels of car ownership than people living in developments with less parking. For example, income is a key determinant of car ownership. Nevertheless, 83 per cent of people with a high income in developments with over 0.5 spaces per unit have a car compared to 56 per cent of the same income group with less parking available. Figure 145 shows the relationship between parking availability and car ownership. People choose a home that meets their needs; there is a close relationship between the importance attached to parking by residents and their satisfaction with the quality of parking in the local area. People who have cars use them: in both Inner and Outer London, car owners use their cars frequently at all times of day, including during the busiest peak periods. Therefore, overall, developments with more parking contain... more car owners and generate more car journeys than developments with less parking provided. This was true for all groups and in all areas studied. The level of car parking provided in new developments therefore has a substantial impact on the level of car use generated by that development. Figure 146 summarises how parking provision leads to car ownership and use.
**Figure 146 How parking provision leads to car ownership and use**
Source: Residential Parking Provision in New Developments (TfL 2012) 7.6 How the design and location of new developments influences sustainable travel
Integrating land use planning and transport will have a key role to play in shaping London and in delivering social, economic and environmental sustainability. Land use and transport are intrinsically linked because
- Growth and spatial distribution of different land uses (such as housing, employment, retail, etc.) generates travel demand. The scale of distribution of homes is a key determinant of infrastructure requirements across London.
- Dwelling typology, household size, and tenure mix has implications for trip generation, while geographic location has implications for sustainable and active travel patterns as well as parking requirements.
- Transport infrastructure plays an important role in unlocking development potential of regeneration areas and providing access to the wider region. Affordability of transport fares becomes an issue as rising housing costs lead to more low income workers living in Outer London. This may have implications for Central London labour supply.
The evidence shows that if it is easier to travel by public transport and active modes, people will do so, but where it is more convenient to travel by car – because origins and destinations are spread out, public transport connectivity is poor or parking is readily available – people will choose the car. The situation and design of new housing will determine the travel patterns of its residents. Higher density, well connected housing, offering a good quality environment for walking and cycling, and limited parking provision, will encourage people to travel sustainably. New employment should similarly be well connected by public transport and active modes to the potential workforce, with limited parking, to deter commuting by car. 7.7 Summary: new homes and jobs
London is vital to economic growth across the UK – it is the most productive region and is the UK’s only global centre
London sits at the heart of the UK economy, accounting for just under a quarter of national economic output. It plays a unique role as a global employment hub, one of a small number of very large cities around the world. The centre hosts a cluster of globally competitive sectors, and accommodates a third of London’s jobs in just 2 per cent of its area. 45 per cent of GVA was generated in just six central Boroughs, making this the most productive part of the UK. Central London has grown more than elsewhere, yet compared to other similar cities there remains scope to increase its density and productivity.
Jobs in central London depend on rail capacity; by 2041 demand will outstrip supply, possibly limiting growth
All of London’s key employment centres are in locations which can be reached by more than two million people within 45 minutes and this is where the most growth is expected, with three quarters of a million additional people expected to be working in central London and the Isle of Dogs by 2041.
Transport capacity constraints can limit this connectivity and may lead to lost economic potential if crowding starts to deter people from working in the centre. A crowded network, with the frustrations and inefficiencies this brings will eventually act to constrain the available labour market and encourage businesses to look elsewhere to invest. New rail capacity will be required to meet demand and ensure London’s economy can continue to thrive.
Beyond the centre, travel is more car dependent but town centres could become sustainable travel hubs
At least four in ten journeys made by London residents start or end in a town centre and town centres also act as transport hubs, with larger town centres all served by Tube or rail services and multiple bus routes. Whilst London residents are less likely to drive to town centres than other destinations, nevertheless, on an average day, there are 1.5 million car trips to town centres. As our shopping habits change, the role of town centres is changing, with retail consolidating in larger centres.
London needs 50,000 new homes a year but is delivering half that - transport investment can unlock development
To meet the needs of London’s current and future population, 50,000 new homes are needed every year, equivalent to a new home every 11 minutes, 24 hours a day for the next 25 years, but only around half this have been delivered in recent years. A constrained housing supply means people are paying more to live in worse conditions. In the long term, a constrained housing market will deter people from living and working in London and threaten economic growth.
Transport has a key role in unlocking housing development. Homes in the best connected areas command a price premium, currently 2.5 per cent for Crossrail 1 above surrounding areas, and a disproportionate amount of development has taken place in very well connected areas. Many of the areas with the greatest capacity for development have poor transport connectivity, hampering development
London’s Opportunity Areas are the largest reservoir of developable land, but many suffer from poor transport connectivity at present. Investing in new public transport capacity could unlock the delivery of hundreds of thousands of homes that may not otherwise come forward for development. In particular, it is estimated that Crossrail 2 alone could support 200,000 new homes and 200,000 jobs along its route. TfL as a landowner can contribute directly to the supply of housing; TfL is the owner of 5,700 acres of public land in London and sites have been identified that could potentially deliver 10,000 homes over the next five years.
London’s low density sprawl has contributed to high car use, new developments should make it easy to travel sustainably
Where people live to a large extent determines their travel patterns: car ownership and use is higher in places where access to jobs, shops and services depends on the car. People living in more densely populated areas, close to shops and services, and with access to good public transport services are more likely to travel by public transport, cycling and walking and less likely to travel by car. The car mode share for those living the furthest from a town centre is nearly three times that of those living very close to a town centre. Similarly, commute patterns are determined by how well served workplaces are by public transport. How people commute is particularly important because people who need a car for work are far more likely to drive all their other journeys as well.
Car ownership and use also tends to be higher where there is better parking provision, based on the assumption that off-street parking is better than on-street, and that unpermitted parking is better than permitted. In inner London, there is some evidence that the cost of parking is deterring people from owning and running a car. In new developments, there is clear evidence that more parking means more car use than would be seen otherwise.
In summary, it is clear that the situation and design of new housing will determine the travel patterns of its residents. Higher density, well connected housing, offering a good quality environment for walking and cycling, and with limited parking provision, will encourage people to travel sustainably. Equally, in order to prevent rising car travel, new employment should be well connected by public transport and active modes to the potential workforce, with limited parking, to deter commuting by car.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4025-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 188,
"total-input-tokens": 362139,
"total-output-tokens": 72722,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
126,
1
],
[
126,
126,
2
],
[
126,
2809,
3
],
[
2809,
6243,
4
],
[
6243,
8216,
5
],
[
8216,
10412,
6
],
[
10412,
13641,
7
],
[
13641,
16946,
8
],
[
16946,
20229,
9
],
[
20229,
23233,
10
],
[
23233,
26236,
11
],
[
26236,
29574,
12
],
[
29574,
32174,
13
],
[
32174,
35647,
14
],
[
35647,
39192,
15
],
[
39192,
40273,
16
],
[
40273,
40990,
17
],
[
40990,
43916,
18
],
[
43916,
45784,
19
],
[
45784,
47281,
20
],
[
47281,
48220,
21
],
[
48220,
48378,
22
],
[
48378,
50237,
23
],
[
50237,
51271,
24
],
[
51271,
51464,
25
],
[
51464,
52775,
26
],
[
52775,
53847,
27
],
[
53847,
55815,
28
],
[
55815,
56758,
29
],
[
56758,
57204,
30
],
[
57204,
58203,
31
],
[
58203,
61225,
32
],
[
61225,
63172,
33
],
[
63172,
66001,
34
],
[
66001,
67739,
35
],
[
67739,
69812,
36
],
[
69812,
71501,
37
],
[
71501,
74738,
38
],
[
74738,
76197,
39
],
[
76197,
77795,
40
],
[
77795,
80072,
41
],
[
80072,
81010,
42
],
[
81010,
81870,
43
],
[
81870,
85920,
44
],
[
85920,
87694,
45
],
[
87694,
88283,
46
],
[
88283,
89944,
47
],
[
89944,
93058,
48
],
[
93058,
94596,
49
],
[
94596,
95874,
50
],
[
95874,
97628,
51
],
[
97628,
99699,
52
],
[
99699,
100952,
53
],
[
100952,
103459,
54
],
[
103459,
104792,
55
],
[
104792,
106388,
56
],
[
106388,
108384,
57
],
[
108384,
110086,
58
],
[
110086,
113758,
59
],
[
113758,
115317,
60
],
[
115317,
118826,
61
],
[
118826,
120538,
62
],
[
120538,
122700,
63
],
[
122700,
124464,
64
],
[
124464,
125476,
65
],
[
125476,
127674,
66
],
[
127674,
127885,
67
],
[
127885,
129463,
68
],
[
129463,
129798,
69
],
[
129798,
130898,
70
],
[
130898,
132253,
71
],
[
132253,
132990,
72
],
[
132990,
133250,
73
],
[
133250,
134900,
74
],
[
134900,
136661,
75
],
[
136661,
137727,
76
],
[
137727,
138351,
77
],
[
138351,
139829,
78
],
[
139829,
141271,
79
],
[
141271,
141740,
80
],
[
141740,
143382,
81
],
[
143382,
145132,
82
],
[
145132,
147538,
83
],
[
147538,
149514,
84
],
[
149514,
150392,
85
],
[
150392,
151082,
86
],
[
151082,
152228,
87
],
[
152228,
152574,
88
],
[
152574,
155697,
89
],
[
155697,
158759,
90
],
[
158759,
160014,
91
],
[
160014,
163139,
92
],
[
163139,
164052,
93
],
[
164052,
167330,
94
],
[
167330,
170635,
95
],
[
170635,
172513,
96
],
[
172513,
175477,
97
],
[
175477,
177893,
98
],
[
177893,
180013,
99
],
[
180013,
180253,
100
],
[
180253,
181838,
101
],
[
181838,
181968,
102
],
[
181968,
183858,
103
],
[
183858,
185658,
104
],
[
185658,
186716,
105
],
[
186716,
189796,
106
],
[
189796,
191287,
107
],
[
191287,
192846,
108
],
[
192846,
194810,
109
],
[
194810,
198178,
110
],
[
198178,
199393,
111
],
[
199393,
202102,
112
],
[
202102,
205246,
113
],
[
205246,
206009,
114
],
[
206009,
207414,
115
],
[
207414,
208864,
116
],
[
208864,
210730,
117
],
[
210730,
212281,
118
],
[
212281,
213773,
119
],
[
213773,
215274,
120
],
[
215274,
216659,
121
],
[
216659,
218667,
122
],
[
218667,
218822,
123
],
[
218822,
222227,
124
],
[
222227,
223676,
125
],
[
223676,
225128,
126
],
[
225128,
226280,
127
],
[
226280,
227736,
128
],
[
227736,
229313,
129
],
[
229313,
230868,
130
],
[
230868,
232124,
131
],
[
232124,
233941,
132
],
[
233941,
234374,
133
],
[
234374,
235918,
134
],
[
235918,
235965,
135
],
[
235965,
237764,
136
],
[
237764,
238974,
137
],
[
238974,
239071,
138
],
[
239071,
239168,
139
],
[
239168,
239265,
140
],
[
239265,
240425,
141
],
[
240425,
240714,
142
],
[
240714,
242395,
143
],
[
242395,
243285,
144
],
[
243285,
245186,
145
],
[
245186,
246696,
146
],
[
246696,
246912,
147
],
[
246912,
250341,
148
],
[
250341,
252964,
149
],
[
252964,
254655,
150
],
[
254655,
254783,
151
],
[
254783,
256371,
152
],
[
256371,
258038,
153
],
[
258038,
258711,
154
],
[
258711,
260370,
155
],
[
260370,
261616,
156
],
[
261616,
264669,
157
],
[
264669,
268007,
158
],
[
268007,
269538,
159
],
[
269538,
272382,
160
],
[
272382,
274428,
161
],
[
274428,
275977,
162
],
[
275977,
277271,
163
],
[
277271,
279852,
164
],
[
279852,
282320,
165
],
[
282320,
282937,
166
],
[
282937,
283030,
167
],
[
283030,
284663,
168
],
[
284663,
286297,
169
],
[
286297,
286946,
170
],
[
286946,
288341,
171
],
[
288341,
289479,
172
],
[
289479,
289810,
173
],
[
289810,
291924,
174
],
[
291924,
292832,
175
],
[
292832,
293049,
176
],
[
293049,
293714,
177
],
[
293714,
295069,
178
],
[
295069,
296618,
179
],
[
296618,
298416,
180
],
[
298416,
298679,
181
],
[
298679,
300876,
182
],
[
300876,
302059,
183
],
[
302059,
302486,
184
],
[
302486,
302994,
185
],
[
302994,
304816,
186
],
[
304816,
307894,
187
],
[
307894,
310508,
188
]
]
} |
f561a57625c4b163a68fb83250647dabaa4131b7 | The Mayor’s Transport Strategy is the statutory document that sets out the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan's, policies and proposals to reshape transport in London over the next 25 years. It is an ambitious strategy that puts people’s health and quality of life at the very heart of planning the city’s transport. Along with the new London Plan and the Mayor’s other strategies for economic development, the environment, housing, health inequalities and culture, it provides the blueprint for making London a city that is not only home to more people, but is a better place for all of those people to live in.
The analytical work presented here describes the quantified outcomes of the strategy, assessing the benefits of the strategy in terms of the Mayor’s aims and compared to the current funded plan.
The key conclusion is that with the actions identified in this strategy, a sustainable mode share of 80% can be achieved, meaning that eight in ten journeys made in London will be made on foot, by bicycle or by public transport and just two in ten by car, taxi, private hire vehicle or motorcycle.
This will deliver benefits to London’s health and wellbeing, helping Londoners be more physically active, cleaning up our air and freeing up space to deliver Healthy Streets. Furthermore, the significant increases in rail capacity recommended by the strategy will reduce crowding on public transport and unlock thousands of new homes and jobs. This report presents an appraisal of the key outcomes of the draft Mayor’s Transport Strategy. It is structured as follows:
| Section | Page number | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------| | 1 Approach to evaluating the impact of the draft Mayor’s Transport Strategy | 4 | | 2 Forecasting growth | 12 | | 3 Developing the MTS: assessing the impact of major schemes & proposals | 18 | | 4 Assessing the impact of the draft MTS | 32 | Approach to evaluating the impact of the draft MTS TfL has assessed the outcomes and effectiveness of the draft Mayor’s Transport Strategy
The MTS is an evidence-based policy document that builds on TfL’s empirical understanding of how Londoners travel today, and may travel in the future. Analysis has been undertaken to inform strategy development and assess the effectiveness of various policies and schemes (interventions). This analysis includes a programme of modelling, using TfL’s suite of strategic models and supporting analytical tools.
TfL’s overall approach to forecasting future travel demand is through developing a Core Reference Case, which includes current funded proposals for London.
A series of alternative policies and schemes have been assessed that could help to meet the challenges set out in the Challenges and Opportunities report. Various ‘packages’ have been developed from these alternative policies and schemes and an assessment of their relative effectiveness carried out against the Mayor’s vision for travel in London.
Finally, an assessment has been made of the expected outcomes for London from implementing the MTS policies and proposals. TfL’s suite of strategic models has been used to assess the impacts of proposals contained in the MTS.
TfL’s strategic models have been widely used for forecasting the impacts of transport and land use decisions in London. This has included assessment of previous Mayor’s Transport Strategies and London Plans. The role of the forecasting work for the Draft MTS is threefold:
1. To establish the transport baseline or reference case impact of our current plans, alongside other changes that are expected in travel behaviour and transport network performance in London.
2. To inform the policy making process by assessing different interventions and their impacts.
3. To support a strategic assessment of the plans and policies included within the new MTS, and to assess the expected outcomes from these in the future. The Reference Case assesses what could happen based on growth forecasts, trends and the funded programme.
The MTS relies upon an understanding of what could happen in the future without the measures proposed in the draft strategy. A Reference Case has been produced to build on our understanding of current travel and present possible future travel volumes, distribution and mode share. This has formed the basis of analysis identifying the challenges and opportunities facing London and its transport network over the period to 2041.
The Reference Case is based upon:
1. GLA population and employment projections
2. The funded programme of investment from TfL and other transport providers
3. Wider assumptions about policies relating to aspects such as fares, fuel costs and car parking, including an assumption that ongoing investment will facilitate continued growth in cycle travel.
### Population and employment growth forecasts
| | Population | Employment | |------------------|------------|------------| | | 2015 (m) | 2041 (m) | | Central London | 0.2 | 0.3 | | Inner London | 3.2 | 3.9 | | Outer London | 5.2 | 6.2 | | Greater London | 8.7 | 10.5 |
### The funded programme includes the following major schemes:
- The opening of the Elizabeth line from 2019
- Northern line extension to Battersea and Nine Elms and upgrades of the Jubilee, Victoria, Northern and sub-surface lines
- Capacity and frequency enhancements, and electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking line
- Capacity and frequency enhancements
- Delivery of HS2, the HLOS and Thameslink upgrade schemes
### Key assumptions determining future travel patterns:
- The economy is expected to grow and the value of time increases.
- The number of cars owned per person is expected to fall, but the population increase is so high that the total number of cars rises.
- Highway capacity for general traffic is expected to reduce in the early years due to measures to increase active travel and public transport use.
- The cost of car use is expected to fall over time, as technology improves vehicle efficiency, but parking costs are expected to increase. To ensure the forecasting assumptions underlying the strategy are robust, analysis has looked at different future scenarios.
All forecasting must accept that the future is inherently uncertain, and this uncertainty increases as we look further into the future. Robust assessment involves understanding how different trends or circumstances could alter the challenges facing London, and the schemes and policies designed to tackle these challenges.
There are many sources of uncertainty:
**Population and the economy:** for example, in the past, London has experienced periods of decline and growth, and the structure of the economy has changed in ways that might not have been predicted 30 or 40 years ago.
**People’s changing behaviour and preferences:** for example, many young Londoners no longer consider obtaining a driver’s license as a ‘rite of passage’. It is very hard to predict such trends.
**As London changes, its population will change:** people’s behaviour is a product of the environment they live in. Relationships between different factors are not always linear, making it hard to predict the longer term impact of measures to change the nature of our city.
**Technological advancement and adoption:** in recent years, smartphones have brought extraordinary lifestyle change. In future, connected, autonomous vehicles could transform travel, but there is much we do not know about how this technology could develop.
Sensitivity tests suggest that the reference case is a robust basis on which to plan, with relatively little variation between tests in terms of the challenges.
______________________________________________________________________
**Approach to sensitivity testing: the ‘wheel of uncertainty’**
- **A. Spatial radical change**
- Land use patterns change
- **B. Economic radical change**
- High growth
- High population, employment & economic growth
- **C. Global economic slowdown**
- Fall in population and employment & changing nature of growth
- **D. Technology radical change**
- Autonomous vehicles, behavioural change, maximising network
**Core Reference Case**
- (GLA central case & standard economic assumptions)
**Sensitivity tests**
- **Sensitivity 1**
- High growth
- High population, employment & economic growth
- **Sensitivity 2**
- Low growth
- Low population, employment & economic growth
- **Sensitivity 3a**
- No decline in car ownership
- **Sensitivity 3b**
- Fuel price increases
- **Sensitivity 4**
- Reduction in discretionary travel
______________________________________________________________________
**Range of percentage growth in trips by mode 2015 to 2041**
- **Public transport**
- **Car**
- **Walking and cycling**
- **All**
Note: the lines indicate the highest and lowest values emerging from the sensitivity tests; the green arrow is the core reference case. Major schemes underwent thorough modelling; this was complemented with testing of ‘illustrative interventions’
Traditionally, transport models are used to test the impacts of rail and road schemes - schemes delivering new infrastructure or capacity. They are less often used to test the impact of schemes at a more conceptual stage, that could be delivered in a number of ways, or schemes designed to deliver mode shift. Therefore, in order to reflect the Healthy Streets goals of the strategy, a new approach was developed allowing the creation and testing of a series of ‘illustrative interventions’, typically radical examples of possible policies. Each test was carried out separately on the 2015 and 2041 Reference Case bases. We learned from the illustrative tests and used our improved knowledge to inform the development of ‘packages’ of interventions for the draft MTS.
| Illustrative interventions modelled as part of the development of the MTS | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Testing to what extent might bus priority, frequency and quality improvements deliver increased bus use, with expected benefits to mode share, connectivity and congestion levels | | Testing how an increase in cycling could contribute to relieving public transport pressure on central London and highway congestion. | | Testing to what extent congestion and traffic growth might be mitigated by reducing car parking and car ownership, and improving public transport access in opportunity areas and town centres. | | Testing to what extent a London wide charge might achieve vehicle kilometres reductions, mode shift, crowding relief and environmental benefits. | | Testing to what extent integrating housing land use and public transport accessibility/access to local services can impact mode share, achieve vehicle kilometres reductions and reduce congestion. | In order to understand the impact and effectiveness of the policies and proposals contained in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, TfL developed a series of cumulative ‘packages’ to be tested in the strategic modelling suite. The packages drew on existing modelling of major rail and road schemes and on lessons learned from the testing of illustrative interventions. These packages are designed to pull together measures of a similar type, and represent measures to be implemented in the short, medium and long term. They get progressively more ambitious – starting with optimising the existing network, then expanding it, then adding new connections, and then introducing measures to reduce traffic and tackle car use. The modelling of policies and proposals concerned with the latter years of the strategy is inevitably more illustrative.
Packages B to D represent the totality of what can be achieved with ‘carrot’ measures, in other words measures designed to improve the public transport and active travel ‘offer’.
Packages E and F represent what more can be delivered with the introduction of measures affecting parking, freight and the way road use is paid for, that reduce traffic demand and free up space to improve the active travel and bus ‘offer’.
Base Scenario 2015
Package A Core reference case representing funded commitments and likely changes in London’s land use and economy
Package B Optimising the Network through lower cost investment schemes across public transport and road space reallocation, including DLR/Overground/Elizabeth Line frequency uplifts and a bus priority network plan
Package C Incremental expansion includes improving rail on our existing network; deep Tube upgrades, the London Suburban Metro and the Silvertown Tunnel
Package D New connections includes the construction of large scale investment projects including Crossrail 2 and the Bakerloo Line Extension and a bus priority delivery
Package E Traffic reduction includes increases in parking charges, intense road space reallocation and a limit on freight traffic growth
Package F Longer term changes to the way road use is paid for and also including measures to encourage green technology uptake
MTS scenario incorporates all of the measures and assumptions tested as part of packages A to F Finally, analysis identified the impact of the policies and proposals in the MTS, identifying ten core outcomes.
In total, the ‘MTS package’ includes all the measures assessed as part of packages A (the reference case or funded programme) to F. This is a representation of all of the quantifiable transport policies and proposals included in the MTS. Ten outcomes have been identified, reflecting the Mayor’s aims, and each incorporating several quantified measures.
The ten outcomes are presented below and described in turn in the final section of this report.
The MTS outcomes will form the basis of future monitoring and evaluation of the MTS and will also be used to guide decision making in TfL and London’s boroughs.
Outcomes of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy
01. 80% of journeys will be made by sustainable modes – public transport, walking and cycling – by 2041, compared to 64% today
02. London’s streets will be healthy & more Londoners will travel actively
03. London’s transport system will be safe & secure
04. London’s streets will be used more efficiently & have less traffic on them
05. London’s streets will be clean and green
06. More people will travel on an expanded public transport network
07. Public transport will be affordable and accessible to all
08. Journeys by public transport will be pleasant, fast and reliable
09. Sustainable travel will be the best option in new developments
10. Transport investment will unlock the delivery of new homes & jobs
TfL’s modelling and analysis demonstrates that, with the range of measures proposed by the MTS, it is possible to achieve an 80% sustainable mode share in London by 2041. Forecasting growth London is growing rapidly, with the population expected to reach 10.5m by 2041. This is 28% higher than in 2011 and is equivalent to adding the combined populations of Birmingham and Glasgow during this time.
The composition of London’s population is also expected to change, altering the emphasis of future demand pressures on the transport networks. In particular, there will be an increase in the numbers of older people – particularly focused in outer London – leading to increased demand for accessible services. 40% of the growth will be in east London, with much of the growth taking place within Opportunity and Growth Areas.
The recent ‘baby boom’ will stabilise, giving net natural change of +80,000 per year.
By 2041, the number of Londoners over 70 will have grown by 85%.
More people will leave London than arrive, with net out-migration of 20,000 per year. Employment is expected to grow by more than a million additional jobs by 2041, concentrated in the Central Activities Zone.
London’s employment has grown from 4.6 million jobs in 2000 to 5.6 million in March 2016 and is projected to grow to 6.25 million by 2031 and 6.75 million by 2041.
Agglomeration will see employment growth concentrated in the central area. 1.4 million jobs are expected in the City of London and Westminster alone.
Tower Hamlets – containing Canary Wharf and the Isle of Dogs – will contain 450,000 jobs. Stratford and Old Oak Common also have the potential to become major hubs.
The Opportunity Areas will also play a key role in supporting London’s growth, with the potential capacity to support nearly 600,000 jobs.
Over the past 15 years manufacturing has been declining and jobs in professional services have been increasing – this is expected to continue. The switch from lower to higher density employment is expected to lead to an increase in commuting by public transport and a fall in commuting by car.
Nevertheless, a third of jobs are in outer London, with a 56% car mode share for commuting. As London grows, we need to ensure more sustainable commuter patterns for travel beyond the centre. By 2041, without the MTS, growth in travel demand will lead to congested and car dominated streets.
Travel demand is expected to increase to around 32 million trips on an average day in 2041, 5 million more than today.
With the committed programme of investment but without the interventions proposed in the MTS, the sustainable mode share is expected to rise from 64% to 70%.
Despite a falling car mode share, vehicle kilometres will rise by around 8% in the morning peak. This reflects the distribution of trips, with more car travel in outer London where trips are longer. This, coupled with a large rise in van traffic of 26%, will lead to an overall rise in traffic on the network if left unchecked.
The interventions proposed in the MTS are intended to deliver mode shift from the car and increase the share of trips made by sustainable modes.
Mode share of travel in London, without the MTS
- **2015**: 26.7m trips
- Public Transport: 36%
- Walk: 2%
- Cycle: 24%
- Car: 37%
- **2041**: 32m trips
- Public Transport: 30%
- Walk: 6%
- Cycle: 24%
- Car: 40%
By the 2040s, there will be 40% more travel happening in London than when TfL was formed in 2001.
Growth in number of trips made in London, actual and forecast
- **2001**: 22.9m trips
- **2011**: 25.3m trips
- **2021**: 28m trips
- **2031**: 30m trips
- **2041**: 32m trips
Traffic growth, in vehicle kilometres, 2015 to 2041, without the MTS
- **Central**: -2%
- **Inner**: 6%
- **Outer**: 14%
- **GLA**: 12% With the measures proposed in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, by 2041 80% of trips will be by sustainable modes.
The delivery of the MTS would enable travel in London to increase, in line with expectations from population and economic growth, by 5 million trips per day to 32 million in 2041 in a sustainable way.
Without the interventions proposed in the MTS, the sustainable mode share is expected to rise from 64% to 70%. With the interventions proposed in the MTS, the sustainable mode share is expected to reach 80% by 2041.
This represents a reduction in the car mode share of 16 percentage points from 2015, a fall of around 45%, and the car mode share is 10 percentage points lower than expected without the MTS.
Mode share of travel in London, with the MTS
| Year | Sustainable modes | Public Transport | Walk | Cycle | Car | |---------------|-------------------|------------------|------|-------|-----| | 2015 | 26.7m trips | 36% | 2% | 24% | 37% | | 2021 with the MTS | 28m trips | 32% | 2% | 24% | 42% | | 2031 with the MTS | 30m trips | 25% | 2% | 24% | 50% | | 2041 with the MTS | 32m trips | 20% | 2% | 24% | 54% |
By 2041, travel will have risen by around a quarter but car travel will have fallen by around a third.
With the MTS, by 2041 there will be...
- 3m Fewer daily car trips
- 250k Fewer cars owned in London The mode share will vary across London but all regions will see shift from car to sustainable modes.
The scale and nature of mode shift will vary across the city. Central London is expected to become almost car-free by 2041, with only one in twenty trips made by car with the strategy. Inner London will continue to shift away from the car, with less than one in ten trips made by car by 2041.
Whilst outer London will still be where the majority of car trips are made, the car mode share is expected to fall significantly from more than a third to around a quarter of trips. This is a reduction of around 1.8 million car trips in outer London alone.
Travel into London will also become less dependent on the car, although travel from outside London into outer London will still mostly be made by car, simply reflecting the lack of available alternatives. Developing the MTS: assessing the impact of major schemes & proposals To inform the development of the MTS, the impacts of major schemes and proposals have been tested.
The following slides describe the results of analysis carried out to test the impacts of major schemes and proposals contained within the MTS.
In some instances, schemes are well developed and a great deal of modelling and analysis has been undertaken. In other cases, new ideas have been developed for the MTS, tested using an illustrative approach to ensure the possible impacts are understood.
This section focusses on some of the largest schemes and also on the new and bespoke testing carried out for the MTS itself. The ‘illustrative interventions’ tests shown here were preliminary tests conducted to explore impacts, and in general are more extreme than the versions included in the final package modelling for the MTS.
The next section describes the impacts of the following interventions:
| Crossrail 2 | Tube, DLR and Tram upgrades | | London suburban rail network | Enhancing the bus network (illustrative) | | Mini-radial networks to town centres with interchange hubs | Increased cycling (illustrative) | | Bakerloo line extension | Better public transport and reduced car travel in town centres and Opportunity Areas (illustrative) | | Silvertown tunnel | Road pricing (illustrative) | | Ultra Low Emission Zone | Focussed growth in high density, well connected areas (illustrative) | Crossrail 2 will carry up to 30 trains an hour in each direction - up to 45,000 people - on the southwest to northeast corridor.
Crossrail 2 involves connecting existing national rail lines in Surrey and Hertfordshire with two new 37km tunnels from Wimbledon to Tottenham Hale and New Southgate. It will boost total rail capacity accessing central London by 10%, and rail capacity across it in the critical southwest-northeast corridor by 40%.
It will relieve the Victoria, Northern and Piccadilly lines, and will remove the need for planned station control at the Underground stations serving 5 of the 6 busiest National Rail termini, as well as vital interchanges such as Clapham Junction and Vauxhall in the south, and Highbury & Islington, Finsbury Park, Seven Sisters and Tottenham Hale in the north. Furthermore, by addressing congestion at Euston, it will support High Speed 2’s integration into London’s transport network.
Crossrail 2 will unlock around 200,000 additional homes and support 200,000 new jobs.
Crossrail 2 will transform connectivity to key Growth Areas in northeast London. The West Anglia Main Line is currently the busiest mixed-traffic two-track railway in the country. Crossrail 2 will four-track this railway, quadrupling service frequencies to some destinations in the Upper Lea Valley, and shorter journey times across the wider London-Stansted-Cambridge Corridor will be possible.
To address critical crowding challenges on the South West Main Line. Crossrail 2 will create the space for around 20 extra local and regional trains per hour and 10 further additional trains per hour to serve the corridor from Wimbledon inwards. Capacity released will also allow several new long-distance services to cities such as Portsmouth and Southampton, and key locations for housing and business growth.
Forecast key station performance with Crossrail 2, 2041, AM and PM peaks
- Need for planned station control removed
- Planned station control required
- Planned station control required, effects likely to spread and closures likely to last more than 15 minutes A London Suburban Metro would offer improved frequencies, journey times and interchange opportunities.
South London relies on its suburban rail network for connectivity to central London. However, there is a substantial and growing gap between the level of service that can be offered on National Rail in south London, and the frequency and reliability now offered on the Tube and bus network.
Creating a London Suburban Metro in south London could increase capacity into central London on these services by over a third in the peak period, providing capacity for an additional 125,000 passengers to travel to central London in the morning peak. This could deliver peak period capacity increases on suburban services of around two thirds at Victoria and Charing Cross and a half at Cannon Street.
**Capacity to central London**
- **125,000** more people could travel into central London in the morning peak
- 20% more capacity due to longer or improved rolling stock
- 80% more capacity due to higher service frequencies
**Capacity on non-radial services across London**
- **38,000** more people could travel on non-radial services around inner and outer London
- 55% of new capacity provided by east and west London rail lines
- 45% of new capacity provided by Tram services
A London Suburban Metro could be delivered by the late 2020s. Mini-radial networks to London’s town centres can create interchange hubs; linked together they allow orbital rail trips.
Potential mini-radial hubs and improved orbital links in inner and outer London
Improvements would enable mode shift from the car, offering reliable, less crowded and fast public transport to local destinations.
Reduction in crowded hours compared to reference case, 2041 morning peak
Change in passenger kilometres compared to reference case, 2041 morning peak
New orbital services would reduce crowding on all modes, particularly DLR and Trams. Extending the Bakerloo line to Lewisham and beyond improves connectivity, reduces crowding and unlocks development.
The MTS proposes the extension of the Bakerloo line from Elephant and Castle to Lewisham, with interchanges with Overground, DLR and National Rail services at New Cross Gate and Lewisham. This would deliver an increase in frequency on the Bakerloo Line to 33 trains per hour, providing the capacity for 65,000 more journeys in the morning and evening peaks. Lewisham and New Cross Gate would offer significantly improved connectivity to the Overground, DLR and National Rail services. Journey times from Lewisham to central London will fall by 9 minutes, and the better connectivity means that up to 2.6 million jobs will become 10 minutes closer to the area served. The Bakerloo Line Extension would also deliver crowding relief on National Rail by providing an alternative route into London, and on local bus services by providing local London underground capacity.
The Bakerloo extension would unlock 25,000 new homes and 5,000 new jobs in the Old Kent Road and the Lewisham, Catford and New Cross Opportunity Areas.
Benefits of the Bakerloo line extension for new homes and jobs:
- Improved Labour Supply
- Affordable Homes
- Regeneration and Quality of Life
The BLE relieves labour supply constraints by increasing capacity of the transport network, providing new connections, helping relieve bottlenecks at main termini stations.
By stimulating higher rates of delivery of new housing within Opportunity Areas, BLE will support productivity growth in London’s Central Activities Zone (CAZ).
By enabling an increase in the supply of new housing, the BLE will improve the affordability of housing for non-CAZ workers as well.
The BLE will support much needed regeneration in areas of southeast London that have been held back from sharing in London’s success by inadequate transport connectivity.
The BLE will improve the quality of life for southeast London residents by improving connectivity to key locations, tackling road congestion and poor air quality on main routes.
Bakerloo line extension
[Map showing the proposed extension of the Bakerloo line from Elephant and Castle to Lewisham, with interchanges at New Cross Gate and Lewisham.] The Silvertown tunnel will provide a reliable and resilient cross-river road link, enabling new bus links.
Involving construction of a new highway tunnel under the River Thames between the Greenwich Peninsula and Silvertown. The tunnel is proposed to be charged for general traffic, locking in the benefits so that there will be minimal changes to overall traffic levels. The tunnel includes a dedicated bus/coach and HGV lane in each direction and will deliver at least 20 buses per hour in the opening year.
The Silvertown tunnel increases the resilience of the strategic road network in east and south-east London. Over-height vehicles typically result in over 1,000 unplanned closures each year at the Blackwall tunnel; unplanned closures would reduce significantly. This makes the region more attractive for investment, with 3,000 new jobs expected to be created by 2041 as a result of the scheme.
Potential bus routes enabled by the Silvertown tunnel
Comparison of average weekday journey time with the Silvertown tunnel and as observed in 2012
Eliminates the severe congestion that routinely affects the Blackwall Tunnel, with journey time savings of up to 20 minutes at peak times expected on the approaches to the tunnels. The Ultra Low Emission Zone will reduce emissions from road transport and bring benefits to health
Air pollution caused by carcinogenic diesel emissions, high levels of nitrogen dioxide (NO₂) and particulate matter (PM) exacerbate health conditions and shorten the lives of Londoners.
The Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) will cover the same area as the Congestion Charging Zone. A daily charge (7 days a week) of £12.50 for light vehicles and £100 for heavy vehicles will be applied for vehicles that don’t meet the required standard (Euro 4 for petrol and Euro 6 for diesel).
Subject to consultation, the original September 2020 start date for the central ULEZ is being brought forward to April 2019. This is ahead of a series of expansions London-wide for heavy vehicles in 2020 and across inner London for light vehicles in 2021.
Impacts:
- As a result of implementing the ULEZ in central London sooner, road transport NOx emissions in central London are expected to reduce by 20% in 2019.
- The area of central London exceeding legal limit values for NO2 would reduce from 30% to 22% and 42% fewer people in central London would be living in areas exceeding the legal limits for NO2 concentrations.
- There will also be ‘knock on’ benefits outside central London as a result of cleaner vehicles passing through inner and outer London to access central London.
- There are benefits in reducing exposure to air pollution by introducing ULEZ 17 months earlier, for example reducing the risk of hospital admissions for heart and lung conditions worsening symptoms and severity of asthma. MTS proposes capacity and frequency increases on the Elizabeth line, tube, trams & DLR beyond current funded plans
Upgrades will improve the capacity, frequency and reliability of TfL’s train services to support the demand generated by a growing population and economy, reduce crowding and encourage people to travel by public transport. The improvements significantly increase morning peak capacity in 2041 by 26 per cent across the London network, with 1 per cent arising from Tram improvements, 4 per cent from DLR improvements, 16 per cent from London Underground improvements and 6 per cent from the Elizabeth line frequency increase. The increase in capacity significantly reduces crowding across TfL’s rail network in London.
The upgrades increase frequencies on many lines to 36 or 37 trains per hour, considered the maximum for reliable operations.
On average, the proportion of passenger kilometres travelled in crowded conditions (greater than 4 people per square metre) is reduced from above 50% to approximately 35% by this package of improvements.
2041 Crowding before and after TfL rail frequency and capacity improvements
- Increased service frequency to 30 trains per hour.
- Increased frequency to 30 trains per hour.
- Increased frequency to 7.5 trains per hour on all routes.
- Increased capacity & frequency on:
- Central Line (37tph)
- Piccadilly Line (36tph),
- Jubilee Line (36tph)
- Northern Line (towards 36tph)
- Waterloo & City Line (30tph)
- Bakerloo Line (26tph)
tph = trains per hour Improving and expanding the bus network would encourage more people to travel by bus
This illustrative test was carried out to understand the potential demand for improved bus services, and to explore the potential role for buses in delivering mode shift from the car.
The test includes a number of measures including bus priority, bus frequency and the quality of buses, each expected to make buses more attractive.
The measures tested were:
- 20% reduction in bus journey time over 2011 levels in inner and outer London.
- Increase in bus frequency in line with population growth by borough outside central London.
- Factor to represent bus service quality improvements.
Testing to what extent might bus priority, frequency and quality improvements deliver increased bus use, with expected benefits to mode share, connectivity and congestion levels?
Key findings:
- Improving bus connectivity and quality significantly increases bus usage with a 65% increase in passenger kilometres.
- The scale of growth suggests that the investment is realising otherwise suppressed demand for bus services.
- Overall, public transport use increases by 500,000 trips per day compared to the 2041 reference case. There is a small reduction in rail and Underground use of approximately 5% but this is more than offset by the increased bus demand.
- Some trips come from the car but more come from active modes, reflecting the distribution of those trips and also because car remains attractive. This suggests that improving the bus network would enable mode shift, but that measures to deter people from using their cars would also be required to deliver widespread mode shift.
Change in public transport passenger kilometres, 2041 compared to reference case
| % Change (12 hr, trips in GLA) | Rail | UG | Bus | All PT | |-------------------------------|------|----|-----|--------| | | -3% | -6%| 66% | 6% | A significant increase in cycling could deliver a more efficient use of the street network and a healthier population. This test was designed to identify the impact of a very substantial increase in cycle travel on public transport and the road network. The cycle mode share currently stands at 2% and the reference case assumes a 6% cycle mode share by 2041.
The test did not explore how an increase in cycling could be achieved; for which separate analytical work using bespoke tools has been undertaken.
As such, the test involved increasing the cycle mode share to 15%. The test assumes that there is a slightly greater reduction in car than public transport trips, with some reduction in walking for shorter journeys.
Testing how an increase in cycling could contribute to relieving public transport pressure on central London and what the impact might be on highway congestion.
Key findings:
- A 15% cycle mode share could reduce the number of car trips in London by 1.2 million on an average day.
- This would have the effect of reducing traffic congestion by 13% across London – this reflects the greater space efficiency of cycles compared to cars.
- People would also be expected to switch to cycling from public transport, relieving pressure on the bus and Underground networks in particular.
- There would be some reduction in walk travel, but overall the number of trips made by active modes could increase by nearly 40%.
Change in trips by mode with 15% cycle mode share, 2041 compared to reference case
- Car: -21%
- PT: -10%
- Walk/Cycle: 37% Measures to deter car ownership alongside better public transport connections can deliver mode shift in growth areas
A significant proportion of future car growth comes from opportunity area developments and four in ten journeys made by London residents start or end in a town centre. This test was designed to understand to what extent traffic growth and congestion could be mitigated by a broad package of interventions discouraging car ownership, reducing parking and increasing public transport connectivity.
To illustrate what could be achieved with radical measures, the following changes were made to model parameters:
- Public transport was made more appealing and better connected.
- Private car ownership and private non-residential parking was removed in town centres and Opportunity Areas.
Key findings:
- Discouraging car usage and increasing public transport connectivity in Opportunity Areas and town centres produces a significant decrease in car use of 600,000 trips per day.
- Most of the car trips shift to public transport, with some switching to walking and cycling. It is likely that in actuality the reduction in car use and parking would free up considerable road space, and would be accompanied by a programme of Healthy Streets measures which would encourage active travel more than this.
- There is an associated decrease in congestion across Greater London of 9%. The greatest reduction is in inner London at 11%.
Low car ownership on its own could deliver a high sustainable mode share, but public transport investment is necessary to provide the connectivity to make these attractive places to live, work and visit.
Testing to what extent congestion and traffic growth might be mitigated by reducing car parking and car ownership, and improving public transport accessibility in opportunity areas and town centres. Changing the way road use is paid for could deliver mode shift, reduce traffic and cut emissions harmful to health
The purpose of this test was to explore the benefits that changing the way road use is paid for might achieve in terms of mode shift, traffic reduction, congestion relief and environmental benefits.
The aim was also to understand the potential impact on public transport, walking and cycling.
A distance-based charge per kilometre was introduced to the model for inner and outer London.
This test was purely designed as an illustration of the relationships between the scale of charging and the possible impacts, and does not represent a real-world scheme design.
Testing to what extent changing the way road use is paid for might achieve vehicle kilometres reductions, mode shift, crowding relief and environmental benefits.
Key findings:
- This test generated mode shift away from car with a reduction of 350,000 car trips per day, which shift equally to walking/cycling and public transport.
- Bus passenger kilometres increase by 6% London-wide.
- There are significant reductions in car kilometres and congestion across inner and outer London, with 5,000,000 fewer car kilometres on the roads overall and a 15% reduction in congestion across inner and outer London.
- There are also vehicle kilometres and congestion benefits in central London.
If coupled with improvements to the public transport offer and Healthy Streets, the impact of such a scheme would be greater. If population growth takes place mostly in denser and well connected areas, sustainable travel will be more likely.
Testing to what extent integrating housing land use and public transport accessibility/access to local services can impact mode share, achieve vehicle kilometres reductions and reduce congestion.
Key findings:
- Focusing population growth in areas with good public transport connectivity reduces car trips by 74,000 trips per day. This is less than might be expected, and reflects the fact that a significant proportion of London’s growth is already expected to take place in relatively high density and well connected areas.
- Congestion would marginally increase in central and inner London (by 1%) due to an increase in population growth in these areas, and decreases in outer London by 1 to 2%.
- There is also a small reduction in public transport passenger kilometres as people travel shorter distances.
- Much of future population growth is already planned in areas with good public transport connectivity and this scenario does not have significant impacts on mode shift nor congestion.
This illustrative test is designed to understand to what extent integrating housing land use and public transport connectivity can deliver mode shift from car to sustainable modes. This means testing whether encouraging growth in more dense and better connected areas would deliver a higher sustainable mode share than more dispersed growth.
The measures tested were:
- All growth to happen only in areas with a public transport accessibility level of 4 or above, within 1km of a town centre or with access to greater than 600,000 jobs within 45 minutes and a rail station within 1km.
- This also results in a reduction in car ownership, as car ownership is related to population density. Assessing the impact of the draft MTS Six strategic modelling packages have been defined to determine the schemes and policies deliver the Mayor’s vision.
Package A. With the funded programme, London could accommodate some growth, but at the expense of traffic growth, congestion, crowding and poor bus performance.
Package B. Bus priority and some limited rail based frequency improvements to the existing network could improve travel experience, but would not tackle traffic levels.
Package C. Upgrades of the remaining Tube lines and other rail services including the London Suburban Metro are needed to tackle crowding on the Tube and maximise the potential of rail in South London.
Package D. New rail connections will reduce crowding, unlock development and enable London to accommodate greater growth.
Package E. Traffic reduction measures could free up the space needed to achieve Healthy Streets for Londoners and reduce emissions.
Package F. In the longer term, changing the way road use is paid for could help deliver an 80 per cent sustainable mode share for London.
The MTS scenario includes all of packages A to F. Ten outcomes describe how the MTS will deliver the Mayor’s aims, transforming the streets and transport network.
Ten outcomes have been identified, reflecting the Mayor’s aims and the adoption of the Healthy Streets Approach, each incorporating several quantified measures. The outcomes describe how the strategy will mean that 80% of trips are made by a sustainable mode, and how the strategy will deliver Healthy Streets and healthy people, a good public transport experience, and new homes and jobs.
The ten outcomes are presented below and described in turn throughout the remainder of this report. Inevitably, not all aspects of the strategy can be quantified or forecast, and some schemes and proposals are more developed than others at this stage. The MTS outcomes will form the basis of future monitoring and evaluation of the MTS and will be used to guide decision making in TfL and London’s boroughs.
| Healthy Streets and Healthy People | A Good Public Transport Experience | New Homes & Jobs | |-----------------------------------|-----------------------------------|-----------------| | **Active** | **Safe** | **Unlocking** | | 2. London’s streets will be healthy and more Londoners will travel | 3. London’s transport system will be safe & secure | 10. Transport investment will unlock the delivery of new homes & jobs | | 4. London’s streets will be used more efficiently & have less traffic | 5. London’s streets will be clean and green | 9. Sustainable travel will be the best option in new developments | | 6. More people will travel on an expanded public transport network | 7. Public transport will be affordable and accessible to all | 8. Journeys by public transport will be pleasant, fast and reliable | | 1. 80% of journeys will be made by sustainable modes – public transport, walking and cycling – by 2041, compared to 64% today | | |
### 1. 80% of journeys will be made by sustainable modes – public transport, walking and cycling – by 2041, compared to 64% today
- **Healthy Streets and Healthy People**
- **Active**
- London’s streets will be healthy and more Londoners will travel
- **Safe**
- London’s transport system will be safe & secure
- **Efficient**
- London’s streets will be used more efficiently & have less traffic
- **Green**
- London’s streets will be clean and green
- **Connected**
- More people will travel on an expanded public transport network
- **Accessible**
- Public transport will be affordable and accessible to all
- **Quality**
- Journeys by public transport will be pleasant, fast and reliable
- **Good Growth**
- Sustainable travel will be the best option in new developments
- **Unlocking**
- Transport investment will unlock the delivery of new homes & jobs
- **A Good Public Transport Experience**
- **Active**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Safe**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Efficient**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Green**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Connected**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Accessible**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Quality**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **New Homes & Jobs**
- **Active**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Safe**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Efficient**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Green**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Connected**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Accessible**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Quality**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **Unlocking**
- London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2040
- **All Londoners to be doing a healthy level of activity through travel**
- Everyone who is able to should be sufficiently active for health through their regular travel, demonstrated by 70% of people reporting two periods of ten minutes spent walking or cycling on the previous day by 2041.
- **Walking or cycling will be the best choice for shorter journeys**
- By 2041, 70% of Londoners will live within 400m of the London-wide cycle network, the walking environment will be more appealing so that 3 to 5 million more trips could be made by active modes every day.
- **Falling car ownership and use**
- By 2041, there will be at least 5 million fewer daily car trips and a quarter of a million fewer cars owned in London.
- **Traffic will fall and congestion kept in check, allowing more efficient operations**
- By 2041, the proportion of people who say that they don’t feel safe walking by themselves in their local area – currently one in six people – will fall, and fewer people will say that they are deterred from travelling by safety concerns.
- **Falling car use and more efficient traffic activity reduces overall traffic levels by 10% by 2041**
- Traffic congestion remains broadly at 2013 levels during peak periods.
- **Transport schemes will deliver a net positive impact on biodiversity**
- Fewer people will be affected by noise from traffic. The transport system will be more resilient to effects of climate change.
- **The Mayor has frozen fares to make travel more affordable**
- The Mayor will seek to ensure public transport fare levels enable affordable access to travel for all Londoners, including any discounted rail services in TfL’s affordable fares pledge.
- **Everyone will be able to travel spontaneously and independently**
- On average, the amount of extra time spent travelling to make a journey on the step-free network compared to the same journey on the full network will be reduced by around 60%.
- **Car dependency will be reduced and more people will live in well connected areas**
- Car speeds will improve by 10-15% London-wide by 2041, with particular improvements expected in central and inner London.
- **Rail and Tube journeys will be less crowded despite rising passenger volumes**
- By 2041, crowding on rail and underground services will reduce by around 10-20% compared to today, measured in terms of the total crowded distance compared to total distance travelled.
- **Rail capacity to central London will increase by over 80% with new public transport services, improving connectivity and reducing crowding, enabling the delivery of new homes**
- Crossrail 2 will provide new direct connections through central London, reducing crowding and supporting 200,000 new homes and 200,000 new jobs.
- **The Bakerloo line extension will enable 25,000 new homes and 5,000 jobs in the Old Kent Road Opportunity Area**
- An extension of the DLR to Thamesmead could enable up to 17,000 new homes and around 3,000 new jobs.
- **Transport for London land will, where possible, be brought forward for development**
- By 2020/21, TfL will start on the property development that will deliver 10,000 homes. London’s streets will be healthy and more Londoners will travel actively
The Mayor’s aim is for all Londoners to be doing a healthy level of activity through travel. This means that all Londoners will do at least the 20 minutes of active travel they need to stay healthy each day, including trips walked or cycled all the way and as part of public transport trips.
By 2041, walking or cycling will be the best choice for shorter distance journeys London-wide. To achieve this, by 2041 70% of Londoners will live within 400m of the London-wide cycle network and the walking environment will be made appealing using the Healthy Streets Approach. By 2041, between 3 and 5 million more trips could be made by active modes every day than in 2015.
If 70% of Londoners report doing 2 x 10 minutes of active travel on the previous day, then we consider that all Londoners can be assumed to be doing a healthy level of activity through travel.
In total, this will deliver around 1600km of cycle network, nearly 1000km more than in the funded plan. London’s streets will be safe and secure
The MTS will help to ensure everyone will be able to feel safe and secure when travelling, with fewer people deterred from travelling because of concerns about their personal security, crime and antisocial behaviour. The proportion of people who say that they don’t feel safe walking by themselves in their local area – currently one in six people – will fall.
Measures which give greater focus to high harm offences such as sexual offences and hate crime should result in increases in reported offences in the short to medium term as victims and witnesses are encouraged and supported to report these crimes. Reductions in crime will be delivered in the longer term as the London Transport community Safety Partnership works to eradicate these offences from the public transport network.
The proposals will support the Mayor’s vision for a healthier London by delivering improvements in safety and security and reducing key barriers to walking, cycling and using public transport more often.
Tackling road danger with the aim for there to be no deaths or serious injuries on London’s streets
The Mayor’s aim is for there to be no deaths or serious injuries on London’s streets. In 2015, 2,092 people were killed or seriously injured (KSIs) on London’s streets, 42% below the 2005-09 baseline.
The goal set in the MTS is a 65% reduction in the number of people killed or seriously injured on London’s streets by 2022 (against 2005-09 levels) and a 70% reduction by 2030 (against 2010-14 levels), with the goal that by 2041, no one will be killed or seriously injured on London’s streets.
Number of people killed or seriously injured on London’s roads, trends and goals for the future, 2005 to 2041
Buses and coaches are disproportionately involved in collisions with pedestrians and cyclists and in the last three years over 200 pedestrians or cyclists were killed or seriously injured in collisions involving buses or coaches. The Mayor’s aim is that by 2030, no one will be killed in or by London buses. London’s streets will be used more efficiently & have less traffic
Falling car use and more efficient freight activity resulting from the MTS removes 6 million kilometres of traffic on an average day by 2041 compared to 2015. Traffic congestion remains broadly at today’s levels during peak periods. Without the MTS traffic and congestion were expected to rise.
Without the MTS, freight traffic in the central London morning peak was expected to increase by up to 10 per cent in the next ten years; with the MTS, freight traffic is expected to reduce by 10% by 2026 in the central London morning peak. London’s streets will be clean and green
The Mayor’s aims are for all taxis and private hire vehicles to be zero emission capable by 2033, buses to be zero emission by 2037, for all new road vehicles driven in London to be zero emission by 2040, and for London’s entire transport system to be zero emission by 2050.
Modelling carried out to assess the proposals contained in the strategy assumes the mode shift and wider transport changes as described above, as well as the following assumptions:
- the uptake of ultra-low emission vehicles across all vehicle types is in line with the trajectory required for all road transport to become fully zero emission by 2050; and
- That the carbon intensity of the national grid will reduce in line with Government projections.
This could deliver:
- a 72% reduction in CO₂ emissions from transport (excluding aviation, 2013 base) in London by 2041, with road and rail transport on a clear trajectory to reach zero carbon by 2050;
- a 94% reduction in road transport NOₓ emissions by 2041, and compliance with legal limit values for NO₂ levels on London’s streets;
- a 47% reduction in road transport PM₂.₅ and 36% reduction in road transport PM₁₀ emissions by 2041; and
- Transport schemes will deliver a net positive impact on biodiversity. Fewer people will be affected by noise from traffic. The transport system will be more resilient to effects of climate change.
Road, rail and shipping CO₂ emissions, 2013 to 2041
| Year | Current emissions | With committed investment in public transport | With further investment in public transport and measures to deliver mode shift from the car to public transport, walking and cycling | With measures to accelerate transition of the remaining road vehicles to ultra low and zero emission | |------|-------------------|---------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 2013 | 8000000 | 7000000 | 6000000 | 5000000 | | 2041 | 4000000 | 3000000 | 2000000 | 1000000 |
______________________________________________________________________
Path to zero emission transport More people will travel on an expanded public transport network
The package of schemes included in the MTS will mean that total capacity on rail services will increase by around 90% between 2015 and 2041, with more than 80 million additional seat kilometres.
On the bus network, capacity would increase in line with population, equivalent to an increase of around 30% between 2015 and 2041 in terms of the kilometres operated.
It is anticipated that the measures included in the MTS will result in a near doubling of the total distance travelled on public transport services from 2015 to 2041. By 2041 total travel will increase by around 60% on London’s buses and nearly 100% on the tube and rail network.
The Thames will be used more for passengers and freight. Public transport will be affordable and accessible to all
The Mayor will seek to ensure public transport fare levels enable affordable access to travel for all Londoners, including any devolved rail services in TfL’s affordable fares pledge, and has frozen fares to make travel more affordable.
On average, the amount of extra time spent travelling to make a journey on the step-free network compared to the same journey on the full network will reduce by around 60%. Travel time, customer care and the overall accessibility of the network will also be improved.
The maps below show how the difference in travel time for those needing to use the step-free network will be reduced between 2015 and 2041 with the interventions proposed in the MTS. Journeys by public transport will be pleasant, fast and reliable.
Bus speeds are expected to improve as a result of an overall increase in traffic speeds as well as the reallocation of road space to buses.
Bus speeds will improve by 10-15% London-wide by 2041, with particular improvements expected in central and inner London.
By 2041, crowding on rail and underground services will reduce by around 10-20% compared to today, measured in terms of the total crowded distance compared to the total distance travelled.
Proportion of passenger kilometres on crowded links, morning peak, 2041, with the full strategy
Note: ‘crowded conditions’ is defined here as 4 or more people standing per square metre. Sustainable travel will be the best option in new developments
New and enhanced public transport connections and improvements to bus speeds will mean that London residents will be better connected to jobs, services and to one another. In total, 7.6m people will live within 45min travel time of central London, 2.3m more than today.
The number of jobs accessible to the average Londoner within 45 minutes by public transport will increase by 70%.
Fewer London residents will be dependent on a car to access opportunities and services. Nearly 1.8m more people will be living in places with the best transport connections, defined as areas with a public transport accessibility rating of four or above.
Increase in jobs reachable within 45 minutes travel time by zone, 2041 compared to 2015, without MTS
Increase in jobs reachable within 45 minutes travel time by zone, 2041 compared to 2015, with MTS
Note: these maps are designed to show the benefits of improvements to the transport network and therefore do not include projected growth in employment.
People living in many parts of inner London will gain access to a million more jobs as a result of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. Transport investment will unlock the delivery of new homes & jobs
Transport investment can support growth in the Central Activities Zone, in and around town centres and Opportunity Areas, with plans expected to deliver higher than average sustainable mode shares in growth areas.
Areas where transport is the enabler of significant change to an area
Significant investment in transport infrastructure at the area around Old Oak could act as a catalyst for unlocking development opportunities. There is space to create 25,500 new homes and 65,000 jobs.
Crossrail 2 will provide new direct connections through central London, relieving crowding and supporting 200,000 new homes and 200,000 new jobs.
TfL’s planned extension of the London Overground to Barking Riverside will support the delivery of 11,000 new homes.
An extension of the Elizabeth line could support the delivery of a further 55,000 homes and 50,000 jobs in Bexley and north Kent.
An extension of the DLR to Thamesmead could enable up to 17,000 new homes and around 3,000 new jobs.
The Bakerloo line extension will enable over 25,000 new homes and 5,000 jobs in the Old Kent Road Opportunity Area.
Significant investment in transport infrastructure at the area around Old Oak could act as a catalyst for unlocking development opportunities. There is space to create 25,500 new homes and 65,000 jobs.
Transport for London land will, where possible, be brought forward for development. By 2020/21, TfL will start on the property development sites that will deliver 10,000 homes.
Rail capacity to central London will increase by over 80%, with new public transport services improving connectivity and reducing crowding, enabling the delivery of new homes.
10,000 homes on transport land
Transport for London land will, where possible, be brought forward for development. By 2020/21, TfL will start on the property development sites that will deliver 10,000 homes.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4026-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 43,
"total-input-tokens": 73767,
"total-output-tokens": 15394,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
0,
1
],
[
0,
1446,
2
],
[
1446,
2117,
3
],
[
2117,
2168,
4
],
[
2168,
3297,
5
],
[
3297,
4117,
6
],
[
4117,
6357,
7
],
[
6357,
9100,
8
],
[
9100,
10999,
9
],
[
10999,
13295,
10
],
[
13295,
14953,
11
],
[
14953,
14972,
12
],
[
14972,
15847,
13
],
[
15847,
17081,
14
],
[
17081,
18581,
15
],
[
18581,
20032,
16
],
[
20032,
20891,
17
],
[
20891,
20961,
18
],
[
20961,
22365,
19
],
[
22365,
24458,
20
],
[
24458,
25813,
21
],
[
25813,
26387,
22
],
[
26387,
28663,
23
],
[
28663,
29900,
24
],
[
29900,
31493,
25
],
[
31493,
33026,
26
],
[
33026,
34963,
27
],
[
34963,
36529,
28
],
[
36529,
38381,
29
],
[
38381,
39880,
30
],
[
39880,
41690,
31
],
[
41690,
41728,
32
],
[
41728,
42826,
33
],
[
42826,
50196,
34
],
[
50196,
51239,
35
],
[
51239,
53294,
36
],
[
53294,
53898,
37
],
[
53898,
56587,
38
],
[
56587,
57355,
39
],
[
57355,
58104,
40
],
[
58104,
58812,
41
],
[
58812,
60003,
42
],
[
60003,
61940,
43
]
]
} |
dd78b1154adfd095e4eab75ebd6b3cd204ca9348 | Executive Summary
Introduction
The purpose of this addendum is to set out the updated strategic modelling that has been carried out by TfL City Planning to assess the impact and effectiveness of the final Mayor’s Transport Strategy.
The draft Mayor’s Transport Strategy was published in June 2017 with a supporting evidence base that details the evidence used to develop the Strategy. The Outcomes Summary Report(^1) was published as part of the evidence base, summarising the strategic modelling carried out to inform the development of the draft MTS and assessing its impacts and effectiveness.
Since publication of the draft MTS, a draft new London Plan and the 2017 TfL Business Plan have been published in December 2017. The strategic modelling has subsequently been updated to use the latest data and be consistent with the draft new London Plan. This document is an addendum to the Outcomes Summary Report and sets out the updated strategic modelling that has been carried out to assess the impact and effectiveness of the final MTS.
The key conclusion is that, with revised London Plan population and economic growth, the actions identified in the final Mayor’s Transport Strategy make a sustainable, active and efficient mode share of 80 per cent achievable.
Approach to strategic modelling
TfL’s strategic models have been used widely for forecasting the impacts of transport and land use decisions in London and have been comprehensively enhanced and updated for this purpose. The strategic modelling establishes a core reference case as a baseline for transport outcomes with draft new London Plan growth and funded investment, and then assesses the expected outcomes under the MTS Scenario.
Forecasting assumptions in the core reference case
The core reference case includes population and employment projections from the GLA, along with funded changes to the transport network identified in the 2017 TfL Business Plan and National Rail funded plans. It also includes wider assumptions about policies relating to aspects such as fares, fuel costs and car parking.
(^1) http://content.tfl.gov.uk/mts-outcomes-summary-report.pdf The GLA has published a new 2016-based population projection with a spatial distribution that reflects the new 2017 Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) and a new 2017 long term labour market projection. These GLA projections form the basis of the new draft London Plan, and the core reference case used in the draft MTS has been updated to include these new projections.
In 2041, total GLA population growth is now projected to be 10.8 million compared to the previous projection of 10.5 million, and total London employment is projected to reach 6.9 million compared to the previous projection of 6.7 million.
**The MTS scenario and draft new London Plan growth**
The MTS scenario builds on the core reference case and includes policies and proposals outlined within the MTS. In addition to the current funded programme, the scenario includes Crossrail 2, a London Suburban Metro and other upgrades to the national rail network. It includes delivery of the Deep Tube programme, Bakerloo line extension, station capacity work as well as upgrades and extensions to the DLR, Tramlink and London Overground. It includes developing the bus network to meet future demand, applying the Healthy Streets Approach to London’s roads and delivering the full Ultra Low Emission Zone and further policies on vehicle emissions. It also includes indicative traffic reduction measures as required to deliver the Mayor’s vision for travel in London.
**Travel demand and mode share**
Travel demand is expected to increase in proportion to the growth in population and employment from around 27 million trips per day in 2015 to around 33 million trips per day in 2041, compared to 32 million trips in the draft MTS.
In the London Plan core reference case, car percentage mode share is expected to fall from 37 per cent of all trips in 2015 to 32 per cent in 2041. The delivery of the MTS would enable demand for travel in London to increase in a more sustainable, active and efficient way, with car percentage mode share forecast to fall to 20 per cent in 2041.
**Traffic congestion and bus speeds**
Overall traffic congestion is expected to increase by 2041 without delivery of the MTS, with average vehicle speeds decreasing across London. In the MTS scenario, fewer cars and shorter journeys mean that speeds are likely to increase across most of London in 2041 compared to 2015. Reallocating road space to meet MTS Healthy Streets objectives could be achieved while reducing delay at a London wide level.
In the MTS scenario, buses benefit from stable or improved speeds for general traffic as well as the reallocation of road space to buses so that bus speeds improve London-wide to 2041.
**Public transport and crowding**
Strong growth in demand for public transport, particularly for rail based modes, is expected between 2015 and 2041. Crowding will worsen without further investment. With the draft MTS scenario there is an even greater growth of passenger kilometres from 2015 to 2041, however the MTS Scenario schemes would enable crowding on rail services to fall scenario despite rising passenger numbers.
Emissions
With the planned Ultra Low Emission Zone in place in 2019 in Central London, together with improvements to vehicular technology, levels of the four key emissions (CO$_2$, PM$_{2.5}$, PM$\_{10}$ and NO$\_x$) are expected to fall from 2013 to 2041. The MTS scenario, could deliver further significant reductions in the four key emissions.
## Contents
1. Core reference case ........................................ 6
2. MTS Scenario and draft new London Plan growth .... 11
3. Conclusion .................................................. 23
Appendix 1 .................................................... 24
1. Core reference case
Introduction
The core reference case in the draft MTS is described in Chapter 3 of the Outcomes Summary Report published as part of the evidence base, and is summarised below. The core reference case has been updated to include the latest GLA growth projections that form the basis of the draft new London Plan and to be consistent with the 2017 TfL Business Plan. This updated core reference case has been used for future year modelling in the final MTS.
This chapter summarises the forecasting assumptions in the core reference case and the updates to the travel demand and mode share.
Network forecasting assumptions
The core reference case includes funded public transport and highway schemes consistent with the 2017 TfL Business Plan. A scheme list is provided in Appendix 1 and a summary of key schemes is provided below:
- Current view of funded National Rail schemes, HLOS programme, Thameslink programme, HS2, West Anglia and Great Western improvements.
- The opening of the Elizabeth Line in 2019, the Northern Line Extension, and Tube upgrades to the Victoria Line and Four-Line Modernisation programme.
- DLR, Trams, London Overground and bus service improvements.
- TfL’s Healthy Streets portfolio including cycling infrastructure schemes and the introduction by 2019 of the Central London Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Economic forecasting assumptions
Wider assumptions have been made about policies relating to aspects such as fares, fuel costs and car parking, and the key economic assumptions are detailed in Table 1.1. Table 1.1 Key forecasting assumptions
| Assumption | Comments | Source | |-----------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------| | Parking supply and charges | Workplace parking supply is expected to decrease from 2015 to 2041 and parking charges are expected to increase significantly reflecting recent trends and expected continued pressure on parking | TfL | | Car ownership | Car ownership is expected to decrease in line with increasing population densities to an average of 0.29 cars per person in 2041 | TfL | | Economic assumptions | Highway and public transport economic assumptions are taken from WebTAG(^2) December 2015 guidance | DfT | | Public Transport fares | The Mayor’s Fares Freeze applies to TfL fares, with other fares assumed to increase with inflation until 2020. An inflation-linked increase is assumed from 2021. | TfL |
Planning data forecasting assumptions
The core reference case described in the draft MTS Outcomes Summary report included the latest GLA projections at the time of publication which was the 2015 round SHLAA capped population projection(^3) and the 2016 long term labour market projections(^4). Since publication, the GLA has published a new population projection(^5) with a spatial distribution that reflects the new 2017 Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA)(^6) and a new 2017 long term labour market projection(^7). These new GLA projections form the basis of the draft new London Plan, and the core reference case has been updated to include these new projections of population and employment.
Table 1.2 provides detail on the new GLA population and employment projections and comparison to the previous projections included in the core reference case for the draft MTS.
Employment projections are provided for the Central Activities Zone (CAZ) and the North Isle of Dogs (NIOD), the remainder of inner London, and outer London. Population projections are provided for inner and outer London.
______________________________________________________________________
(^2) [https://www.gov.uk/guidance/transport-analysis-guidance-webtag](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/transport-analysis-guidance-webtag)
(^3) [https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/constrained-r2015-shlaa-projection](https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/constrained-r2015-shlaa-projection)
(^4) [https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/long-term-labour-market-projections](https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/long-term-labour-market-projections)
(^5) [https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/projections](https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/projections)
(^6) [https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/london-plan/new-london-plan/evidence-base](https://www.london.gov.uk/what-we-do/planning/london-plan/new-london-plan/evidence-base)
(^7) [https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/long-term-labour-market-projections](https://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/long-term-labour-market-projections) Table 1.2 Population and employment distribution and forecast growth
| Population (millions) | Previous GLA projection | London Plan GLA projection | |-----------------------|-------------------------|---------------------------| | | 2015 | 2041 | 2015-2041 (% growth) | 2015 | 2041 | 2015-2041 (% growth) | | Inner | 3.4 | 4.3 | 24% | 3.5 | 4.4 | 25% | | Outer | 5.2 | 6.2 | 20% | 5.2 | 6.4 | 23% | | Total | 8.6 | 10.5 | 22% | 8.7 | 10.8 | 24% |
| Employment (millions) | Previous GLA projection | London Plan GLA projection | |-----------------------|-------------------------|---------------------------| | | 2015 | 2041 | 2015-2041 (% growth) | 2015 | 2041 | 2015-2041 (% growth) | | CAZ and NIOD | 2.0 | 2.5 | 24% | 2.1 | 2.7 | 28% | | Inner (rest of) | 1.3 | 1.7 | 27% | 1.4 | 1.8 | 29% | | Outer | 2.1 | 2.5 | 16% | 2.1 | 2.5 | 16% | | Total | 5.5 | 6.7 | 22% | 5.6 | 6.9 | 24% |
Source: Greater London Authority.
Total GLA population growth is greater in the new 2016-based projection reaching a total of 10.8 million in 2041 compared to the previous 2015 round projection with a total of 10.5 million in 2041.
Population distribution in the new projection reflects the new 2017 SHLAA, which better represents the latest Opportunity Area homes capacity compared to the previous SHLAA from 2013 which was used in the previous projection. Inner London 2015-2041 population growth is 1 percentage point greater in the new 2016-based projection (25%), and outer London population growth is 3 percentage points greater in the new projection (23%).
In 2041, total London employment is projected to reach 6.9 million in the new 2017 projection, compared to 6.7 million in the 2016 projection.
The majority of additional employment growth in the new 2017 projection is in the CAZ and NIOD, where 2015-2041 growth is 4 percentage points higher than in the 2016 projection. Outer employment growth in the new 2017 projection remains the same as in the 2016 projection.
Travel demand and mode share
Mode share
The 2015 mode share estimate for walking, cycling & public transport has been amended from 64 per cent to 63 per cent in the final MTS. The difference is due to taxi trips which were included in this category in the draft MTS mode share, and which have now been included in the car/taxi/phv mode share. Travel Demand
Population and employment are key drivers of travel demand. Travel demand is therefore expected to increase in proportion to the growth in population and employment shown in Table 1.1. Greater growth in population and employment in the draft new London Plan projections means that there are a greater number of total trips in the future compared to previous projections. In the draft MTS core reference case, demand for travel in London was forecast to increase from around 27 million trips per day in 2015 to around 32 million trips per day in 2041. In the updated core reference case, demand for travel is forecast to increase by approximately a further 0.5 million more trips per day, to around 33 million trips per day in 2041.
Mode share and travel demand for 2015 and the 2041 core reference case is shown in Figure 1.1. Figure 1.1 Mode share and travel demand in 2015 and 2041 core reference case
Active and sustainable mode share: 63%
Active and sustainable mode share: 68%
2015
26.7m trips
37% Public Transport 24% Walk 2% Cycle 2% Car/taxi/phv
2041 core reference case
33m trips
32% Public Transport 6% Walk 25% Cycle 38% Car/taxi/phv 2. MTS scenario and draft new London Plan growth
Introduction
The MTS scenario is described in Chapter 8 of the Outcomes Summary Report published as part of the evidence base, and is summarised below. The core reference case has been updated to include the latest GLA growth projections that form the basis of the draft new London Plan and to be consistent with the 2017 TfL Business Plan. The impact and effectiveness of the MTS scenario has subsequently been assessed against a background of draft new London Plan growth using updated strategic modelling.
This chapter summarises the updated strategic modelling that has been carried out to assess the impact and effectiveness of the final MTS, ensuring consistency with the draft new London Plan and 2017 TfL Business Plan. This chapter reports the updated core reference case and final MTS scenario modelling results, and summarises the differences to those reported in the draft MTS.
Description of the MTS scenario
The MTS scenario begins with the contents of the core reference case and then includes policies and proposals outlined within the MTS. A scheme list is provided in Appendix 1. A summary of key schemes beyond the current funded programme is provided below:
- Rail: deliver Crossrail 2, a London Suburban Metro, Elizabeth Line extension east of Abbey Wood and other upgrades to the national rail network.
- Tube: deliver Deep Tube programme, Bakerloo Line extension to Lewisham (and beyond), station capacity programme and step free Tube stations.
- DLR: deliver the DLR upgrades and potential DLR extension from Gallions Reach to Thamesmead.
- Trams: deliver Tram upgrades and potential Tram extension to Sutton.
- London Overground: deliver network-wide frequency upgrades, strategic interchanges, Barking Riverside extension and potentially other London Overground extensions
- Buses: develop the bus network to meet existing and future demand and deliver the bus priority network and Low Emission Bus Zones.
- Streets: implement the Healthy Streets Approach to deliver improved streets and priority for walking and cycling, deliver Silvertown Tunnel and associated bus improvements including at least 20 buses per hour in the first year.
- Environment: deliver the full Ultra Low Emission Zone, including London wide Low Emission Zone and inner London ULEZ, and policies on vehicle emissions set out in chapter 3 of the draft MTS. • Traffic reduction: indicative measures including changes to residential and workplace parking, changes to the way road use is paid for and freight demand measures as required to deliver the Mayor’s vision for travel in London.
Figure 2.1 shows the overall impact of the rail schemes on capacity. They would deliver an almost 90 per cent increase in capacity to Central London in the morning peak.
**Figure 2.1** Morning peak rail and Underground capacity improvements to Central London, 2015 to 2041 in the MTS scenario The MTS package modelling in the draft MTS Outcomes Summary report has demonstrated that traffic reduction measures are likely to be necessary, in the longer term, to achieve the Mayor’s vision of an 80 per cent mode share for walking, cycling and public transport in 2041. However, the approach to achieving this is illustrative of the required impact and should not be taken as an indication of specific proposals or scheme designs. The trajectory of the implementation reflects shorter term measures in the draft MTS such as air quality improvement and car reduction strategies and the desire to be more ambitious in reducing car ownership within new developments. Other traffic reduction measures and changes to the way road use is paid for are considered in the longer term. Table 2.1 provides a summary of measures tested.
Table 2.1 Summary traffic reduction measures included in the MTS scenario
| Policy type | Description | |--------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Parking supply and charging | Further increases in parking charges, limits on free commuter parking or a work place parking levy | | Car ownership and residential parking| Measures to accelerate the rate of car ownership reduction resulting in a quarter of a million fewer cars owned in London | | Changes to the way road use is paid for| This has been assessed with an indicative distance-based road user charge in the longer term | | Freight demand management | Measures to limit the growth of freight traffic, so that HGV traffic does not rise and van traffic grows only in line with population |
Travel demand and mode share
The delivery of the MTS would enable travel in London to increase, in line with expectations from draft new London Plan population and economic growth, by at least 5 million trips per day to 33 million in 2041 in a sustainable way. Within this increase, car percentage mode share is forecast to fall to from 37 per cent of all trips in 2015 to 33 per cent in 2021. There would be further reductions to 26 per cent in 2031, and finally 20 per cent in 2041. This is summarised in Figure 2.2.
Greater growth in population and employment in the draft new London Plan projections means that there are a greater number of total trips in the future compared to previous projections as reported in the draft MTS Outcomes Summary Report.
If the MTS is delivered, the revised draft new London Plan population and economic growth can be achieved with sustainable transport outcomes. The draft new London Plan and MTS make a sustainable, active and efficient mode share of 80 per cent achievable. Traffic and congestion
In the core reference case, road traffic volumes are expected to grow modestly, at a rate slower than population growth. Traffic volumes are expected to fall in Central London by 4% as a result of reduced highway capacity and increased sustainable and active transport use, with growth concentrated in outer London (9% increase in traffic volumes) where there are fewer public transport options and car ownership and use is less constrained. Growth here is primarily driven by a rising population and growth in van traffic, which is forecast to form an increasing proportion of total motorised traffic.
The measures proposed by the final MTS deliver significant decreases in traffic in the morning peak, as shown in Figure 2.3. The greatest change is in inner London - a 27 per cent reduction. London-wide, the reduction in traffic in the morning peak is 14 per cent. Highway capacity for general traffic in 2041 is lower in the core reference case compared to 2015 as a result of a range of changes, including growth in cycling, pedestrian priority and public realm schemes, which remove capacity for general road traffic. This, combined with increases in population and employment, means that congestion is expected to increase by 2041. Overall vehicle speeds in the core reference case are expected to decrease by up to 24 per cent in Central London from 2015 levels (Figure 2.4), with average vehicle speeds decreasing across London.
In the MTS scenario, fewer cars and shorter journeys mean that speeds are expected to increase across most of London, as shown in Figure 2.4. In Central London, very high levels of road space reallocation to sustainable and active modes means that speeds for general traffic slow, in inner London speeds remain around the same as now, and in outer London, average speeds rise from 28 to 30 kilometres per hour in the morning peak. In effect, reallocating road space to meet Healthy Streets objectives could be achieved while reducing delay at a London wide level. Traffic and congestion modelling in this updated core reference case and MTS scenario show similar results to those reported in the draft MTS Outcomes Summary Report.
Public transport use
Strong growth in demand for public transport, particularly for rail based modes, is expected between 2015 and 2041. The core reference case shows a 57% increase in rail and Underground passenger kilometres in London between 2015 and 2041, resulting from draft new London Plan growth and supported by extra capacity on the networks such as the opening of the Elizabeth Line. Under current plans, bus patronage growth is forecast to be lower than rail growth, reflecting the expected impact of new rail capacity in Central London on bus demand.
The change in annual passenger kilometres by rail, bus and Tube from 2015 to 2041 in the London Plan core reference case and with the MTS scenario is shown in Figure 2.5. There is a near doubling of passenger kilometres from 2015 to 2041 in the MTS scenario as both infrastructure improvements and traffic reduction measures encourage more people to use public transport. The greatest increase is in rail from just over 30 billion passenger kilometres each year in 2015 to approximately 70 billion passenger kilometres in 2041. This is due to the planned introduction of the Elizabeth Line, Crossrail 2 and the London Suburban Metro. Tube passenger kilometres increase significantly due to the planned introduction of the deep Tube upgrades and the Bakerloo Line extension. Note that these forecasts assume higher mode shift from car to public transport than to active modes; in reality, the implementation of the Healthy Streets Approach may lead to a greater shift to active modes than forecast, reducing public transport passenger kilometres somewhat and also bringing crowding benefits.
**Figure 2.5 Change in annual passenger kilometres (millions), 2015 to 2041.**
Public transport modelled usage in this updated core reference case and MTS scenario show similar results to those reported in the draft MTS *Outcomes Summary Report*.
**Bus speeds**
The change in bus speeds from 2015 to 2041 is shown in Figure 2.6. In the core reference case road traffic slows from 2015 to 2041 with a detrimental effect on bus speeds. Unmitigated, planned changes to the road network in Central London would reduce general traffic and bus speeds. London wide bus speeds are projected to reduce from an average of 14.0 kilometres per hour in 2015 to 13.8 kilometres per hour by 2041 in the core reference case.
In the MTS scenario, buses benefit from stable or improved speeds for general traffic as well as the reallocation of road space to buses so that bus speeds improve London-wide to 2041. Despite slowing speeds for general traffic, bus speeds improve in Central London due to the reallocation of road space to buses. London wide bus speeds are expected to increase from 13.8 kilometres per hour in 2015 to over 15 kilometres per hour in 2041 in the MTS scenario. Modelled bus speeds in this updated core reference case and MTS scenario show similar results to those reported in the draft MTS Outcomes Summary Report. The bus speeds in this MTS scenario are slightly slower than in the draft MTS, but are still improved relative to 2015 and the core reference case.
**Crowding on rail and Underground**
Demand for rail services will continue to rise after completion of the currently funded investment programme. Demand for public transport is projected to rise faster than supply from 2021 in the core reference case. Therefore crowding will worsen without further investment. Table 2.2 shows that, from 2015 to 2041, passenger kilometres travelled in severely crowded conditions (defined as links with more than 4 passengers standing per square metre) are expected to increase in the core reference case from 33% to 45% on rail and Underground. Figure 2.7 shows expected crowding levels in 2041 with funded investment and highlights that much of the Tube and rail network would experience crowding such that it would be effectively full throughout the entire morning peak.
Crowding on rail services drops as a result of the MTS scenario, with the proportion of public transport passenger kilometres travelled on crowded links in the morning peak reducing from 33 per cent of the total in 2015 to 29 per cent in 2041. This means that, for an average journey, passengers will experience less crowding, as shown in Table 2.2. If more trips were made by active modes than in the core forecast, and fewer by public transport, crowding would be reduced further. Table 2.2 Proportion of passenger kilometres on links with more than 4 passengers standing per square metre in the morning peak.
| Mode | 2015 | 2041 core ref case | 2041 MTS scenario | |-------------------------------------------|------|--------------------|-------------------| | All rail and Underground | 33% | 45% | 29% | | National Rail, London Overground, Elizabeth Line | 29% | 39% | 28% | | Tube & DLR | 41% | 56% | 31% |
The modelled proportion of crowded passenger kilometres in this updated core reference case and MTS scenario is greater than reported in the draft MTS. This is due to the increased travel demand from the greater growth in population and employment in the draft new London Plan projections, however the MTS scenario still shows a significant decrease in the proportion of crowded kilometres.
Figures 2.7 and 2.8 show forecast crowding on National Rail, Tube, DLR, London Overground and Trams in the morning peak in 2041 for the core reference case and the MTS scenario. Small differences in crowding compared to the draft MTS results are due to increases in the draft new London Plan population and employment growth, and differences in the distribution of growth across London. Figure 2.7 Morning peak crowding on rail and Underground services in London, 2041 core reference case Figure 2.8 Morning peak crowding on rail and Underground services in London, 2041 with London Plan growth + MTS Emissions and air quality
Figure 2.9 shows the 2021, 2031 and 2041 road vehicle emissions of the full MTS scenario against the 2013 baseline. Under this scenario, the whole bus fleet becomes electric or hydrogen powered by 2037, and the uptake of ultra-low emission vehicles across all vehicle types is in line with the trajectory required for all road transport to become fully zero emission by 2050.
This could deliver:
- A 72 per cent reduction in CO₂ emissions from transport (excluding aviation, 2013 base) in London by 2041, with road and rail transport on a clear trajectory to reach zero carbon by 2050.
- A 94 per cent reduction in road transport NOₓ emissions, and compliance with legal limit values for NO₂ levels on London’s streets.
- A 53 per cent reduction in road transport PM₂.₅ and 45 per cent reduction in road transport PM₁₀ emissions.
Figure 2.9 Road vehicle emissions including vehicle emissions policy measures, 2013 to 2040. 3. Conclusion
Since publication of the draft MTS in June 2017, the GLA has published new population and employment projections that form the basis of the draft new London Plan, and TfL have published the latest 2017 Business Plan.
The strategic modelling that was carried out to assess the impact and effectiveness of the draft MTS scenario has therefore been updated to assess the MTS scenario against a core reference case of draft new London Plan growth and schemes consistent with the 2017 TfL Business Plan.
The key impact of these updates is that future travel demand has increased as a result of greater population and employment growth to around 33 million trips per day in 2041. Crowding in the core reference case has also increased in areas where there is greater population and employment growth.
The impact and effectiveness of the MTS scenario relative to the updated core reference case is very similar to the results reported in the draft MTS Outcomes Summary Report which formed part of the draft MTS evidence base. The MTS scenario delivers a significant reduction in traffic and congestion, increase in public transport use, and decrease in crowding.
The MTS scenario is expected to result in fewer cars, quicker journey times for cars and buses and enable the reallocation of road space to achieve Healthy Streets.
The key conclusion is that, with revised London Plan population and economic growth, the actions identified in the final Mayor’s Transport Strategy make a sustainable, active and efficient mode share of 80 per cent achievable.
## Appendix 1: Scheme List
| Scheme | Scenario\* | |-----------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------| | Elizabeth line | Core reference case | | TfL Business Plan Tube service improvements to Victoria Line | Core reference case | | Four-Line Modernisation programme – Metropolitan, District, Hammersmith & City and Circle | Core reference case | | Northern Line extension to Battersea | Core reference case | | TfL Business Plan DLR capacity and service improvements including New Train for Docklands | Core reference case | | TfL Business Plan London Overground capacity and service improvements including Gospel Oak to Barking Line electrification, new trains and increased frequency on North London Line | Core reference case | | TfL Business Plan Tram service improvements including Dingwall Loop and increased frequency to New Addington | Core reference case | | TfL Business Plan Bus service improvements including changes to bus routes to improve reliability and reduce congestion and additional services to support residential growth | Core reference case | | HS2 phase 1 and associated National Rail changes, including mitigation of impacts at street level | Core reference case | | Thameslink Programme | Core reference case | | HLOS programme | Core reference case | | Stratford–Angel Road service | Core reference case | | Funded improvements to the cycle network | Core reference case | | Healthy Streets portfolio in TfL Business Plan | Core reference case | | ULEZ in Central London | Core reference case | | Elizabeth Line 30 trains per hour | MTS scenario | | Tram upgrades | MTS scenario | | Bus priority network | MTS scenario | | Low Emissions Bus Zones (including bus priority) | MTS scenario | | Essex Thameside Increased frequency | MTS scenario | | Watford DCs increased frequency | MTS scenario | | Great Northern Frequency upgrade | MTS scenario | | Healthy Streets Approach | MTS scenario | | Longer term replacement of higher capacity trains on Jubilee and Northern lines | MTS scenario | | Deep Tube programme – Piccadilly, Central, Bakerloo and Waterloo & City | MTS scenario | |---|---| | DLR upgrades | MTS scenario | | London Overground frequency upgrades (network-wide) | MTS scenario | | London Suburban Metro | MTS scenario | | Brighton Mainline Upgrade (higher frequencies) | MTS scenario | | West Anglia Main Line 4-tracking | MTS scenario | | Increased rail capacity (other lines) | MTS scenario | | Silvertown Tunnel and associated bus services | MTS scenario | | Crossrail 2 | MTS scenario | | Bakerloo Line extension to Lewisham and beyond | MTS scenario | | Elizabeth Line extension east of Abbey Wood | MTS scenario | | DLR extension from Gallions Reach to Thamesmead | MTS scenario | | Barking Riverside London Overground Extension\* | MTS scenario | | Strategic interchanges at Clapham Junction, Lewisham, Stratford and Old Oak Common | MTS scenario | | Other London Overground extensions (including Hounslow–Cricklewood/Hendon) | MTS scenario | | Other new public transport river crossings in East London | MTS scenario | | Tram extension to Sutton | MTS scenario | | Develop bus network to meet existing and future demand | MTS scenario | | HS2 phase 2 | MTS scenario | | Reduce, re-time and re-mode deliveries and encourage more freight consolidation | MTS scenario | | Healthy Streets Approach – further measures | MTS scenario | | Traffic reduction measures | MTS scenario | | ULEZ in inner London | MTS scenario | | Longer term changes to the way road use is paid for | MTS scenario |
- All schemes in the core reference case are also included in the MTS scenario.
- Scheme is in the 2017 TfL Business Plan but was not included in the core reference case due to timing of when the modelling work was completed.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4027-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 25,
"total-input-tokens": 41325,
"total-output-tokens": 8868,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
0,
1
],
[
0,
2154,
2
],
[
2154,
5142,
3
],
[
5142,
5631,
4
],
[
5631,
5903,
5
],
[
5903,
7474,
6
],
[
7474,
11047,
7
],
[
11047,
13772,
8
],
[
13772,
14615,
9
],
[
14615,
14941,
10
],
[
14941,
17351,
11
],
[
17351,
17875,
12
],
[
17875,
20658,
13
],
[
20658,
21551,
14
],
[
21551,
22686,
15
],
[
22686,
24312,
16
],
[
24312,
25685,
17
],
[
25685,
27282,
18
],
[
27282,
28670,
19
],
[
28670,
28773,
20
],
[
28773,
28886,
21
],
[
28886,
29842,
22
],
[
29842,
31410,
23
],
[
31410,
34547,
24
],
[
34547,
36293,
25
]
]
} |
08e8429659ce86a511fedb5af56767f36d7d8ec5 | Mayor’s Transport Strategy: Supporting Evidence Outcomes Summary Report July 2017 Mayor’s Transport Strategy: Supporting Evidence Outcomes Summary Report
Executive Summary
The Mayor’s Transport Strategy is the statutory document that sets out the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan’s, policies and proposals to reshape transport in London over the next 25 years. It is an ambitious strategy that puts people’s health and quality of life at the very heart of planning the city’s transport. Along with the new London Plan and the Mayor’s other strategies for economic development, the environment, housing, health inequalities and culture, it provides the blueprint for making London a city that is not only home to more people, but is a better place for all of those people to live in.
This document presents a summary of the strategic modelling carried out to inform the development of the draft Mayor’s Transport Strategy, and to assess its impacts and effectiveness. A series of policies and schemes have been assessed that could help to meet the challenges set out in the draft MTS Supporting Evidence Challenges and Opportunities Report. The analytical work presented here describes the quantified outcomes of the strategy, assessing the benefits of the strategy in terms of the Mayor’s aims and compared to the current funded plan.
The key conclusion is that, with the actions identified in this strategy, a sustainable mode share of 80 per cent can be achieved, meaning that eight in ten journeys made in London will be made on foot, by bicycle or by public transport and just two in ten by car, taxi, private hire vehicle or motorcycle.
TfL’s approach to strategic modelling has ensured that the MTS is grounded in evidence about current and future travel patterns and has assessed the outcomes and effectiveness of the strategy in delivering the Mayor’s aims.
The MTS is an evidence-based document that builds on TfL’s empirical understanding of how Londoners travel today, and may travel in the future. Analysis has been undertaken to inform strategy development and assess the effectiveness of various policies and schemes (interventions). The analysis includes a programme of modelling, using TfL’s suite of strategic models and supporting analytical tools, described in this report.
The MTS relies upon an understanding of what could happen in the future without the measures proposed in the draft strategy. A Core Reference Case has been produced to build on TfL’s understanding of current travel and present possible future travel volumes, distribution and mode share. This has formed the basis of analysis identifying the challenges and opportunities facing London and its transport network over the period to 2041.
All forecasting must accept that the future is inherently uncertain, and this uncertainty increases as we look further into the future. To ensure the forecasting assumptions underlying the strategy are robust, sensitivity testing has been carried out exploring a range of possible future scenarios.
A series of policies and schemes have been assessed that could help to meet the challenges set out in the Challenges and Opportunities report. Various ‘packages’ have been developed from these alternative policies and schemes and an assessment of their relative effectiveness carried out against the Mayor’s vision for travel in London.
Finally, an assessment has been made of the expected outcomes for London from implementing the MTS policies and proposals – the MTS scenario.
The Core Reference Case provides an understanding of what could happen in the future without the measures proposed in the draft MTS, based on current trends, forecasts and the funded programme
The future challenge is set by developing a core reference case, which includes current funded schemes for London and reflects a ‘business-as-usual’ scenario based on current conditions and assumptions. The core reference case takes account of London’s projected population growth from 8.6 million people in 2015 to 10.5 million in 2041 and employment growth from 5.5 million jobs in 2015 to 6.7 million in 2041. It includes fully funded schemes such as the opening of the Elizabeth line in 2019, the funded programme of Tube upgrades, the delivery of HLOS, the Thameslink upgrades and HS2 on National Rail. Major schemes under development but not fully funded or committed, such as Crossrail 2, are not included in the reference case.
By 2041, the number of trips made in London on an average day is expected to rise to 32 million, 5 million more than today. With the committed programme of investment but without the interventions proposed in the MTS, the sustainable mode share is expected to rise from 64 per cent to 70 per cent. Despite a falling car mode share, vehicle kilometres will rise by around 8 per cent in the morning peak. This reflects the distribution of trips, with more car travel in outer London where trips are longer. This, coupled with a large rise in van traffic of 26 per cent, will lead to an overall rise in traffic on the network if left unchecked. Coupled with reduced road capacity for general traffic as a result of interventions to promote sustainable travel, speeds will fall, leading to congested and car dominated streets.
Demand for rail services will rise by more than 70 per cent and, despite significant capacity increases to the mid-2020s, by the 2030s and 2040s, demand will rise faster than supply leading to severe crowding on much of the rail network, including the Tube, Elizabeth Line, DLR, London Overground, Trams and National Rail services. Bus demand will also rise, but speeds will fall reflecting slowing general traffic speeds.
NOx emissions would reduce significantly as a result of the implementation of the Ultra Low Emission Zone, but under the latest Government plans, London would not comply with legal limits for NO2 until 2025, 15 years after the original deadline and will exceed World Health Organisation recommended maximum levels of PM2.5 until well after 2030. Without the action proposed in the MTS, London would not be on track to become zero carbon by 2050. Sensitivity testing has demonstrated that the conclusions of the reference case, including rapid growth in public transport use, walking and cycling and flat or declining car use but rising traffic, are a robust basis on which to plan.
TfL has developed an approach which recognises the intrinsic uncertainty in forecasting future travel demand. Uncertainty increases as the planning horizon moves further into the future, and as it becomes harder to predict how technology, the environment, lifestyle and travel preferences may change. A set of five sensitivity tests have been fully modelled and assessed, reflecting a range of assumptions about population and employment and economic growth, and the cost of car and public transport use. These tests provide a useful range of plausible outcomes against which to assess proposals and schemes. The results show that the broad conclusions of the core reference case, including rapid growth in public transport use, walking and cycling and flat or declining car use are a robust basis on which to plan. A series of more radical changes have been considered on a qualitative basis to provide an indicative understanding of the possible impacts of ‘step-change’ type events on the challenges facing London and the case for individual schemes and policies.
A range of major schemes are under development and modelling has supported the development and appraisal process, identifying optimal scheme designs and quantifying the impacts
Major schemes under development include:
- **Crossrail 2** will carry up to 30 trains an hour in each direction - up to 45,000 people - on the southwest to northeast corridor, relieving severe crowding on many lines and at key stations and unlocking around 200,000 additional homes and supporting 200,000 new jobs.
- **A London Suburban Metro** would offer improved frequencies, journey times and interchange opportunities, so that 125,000 more people could travel into Central London in the morning peak and 38,000 more people could travel on non-radial services around inner and outer London.
- **Mini-radial hubs and improved orbital rail links** can create interchange hubs; linked together they allow orbital rail trips, relieving crowding and enabling mode shift from the car, offering reliable and fast public transport to local destinations.
- **The Bakerloo Line extension** would deliver an increase in frequency on the Bakerloo Line to 33 trains per hour, providing the capacity for 65,000 more journeys in the morning and evening peaks, and could unlock 25,000 new homes and 5,000 new jobs.
- **The Silvertown tunnel and associated bus services** will provide a reliable and resilient cross-river road link, enabling new bus links, delivering at least 20 buses per hour in the opening year.
- **The Ultra Low Emission Zone** covers the same area as the Congestion Charging Zone and introduces a daily charge for vehicles that do not meet required emissions standards. Subject to consultation, the original September 2020 start date for the Central London ULEZ is being brought forward to April 2019, ahead of expansions London-wide for heavy vehicles in 2020 and across inner London for light vehicles in 2021. As a result of the ULEZ, 42 per cent fewer people in Central London would be living in areas exceeding the legal limits for NO₂ concentrations.
- **Further upgrades to the Tube, DLR, Trams and Elizabeth line** would increase morning peak capacity in 2041 by 26 per cent, significantly reducing crowding.
A series of illustrative tests explored the possible impacts of interventions at a more conceptual stage and particularly those designed to deliver mode shift
Traditionally, transport models are used to test the impacts of rail and road schemes - schemes delivering new infrastructure or capacity. They are less often used to test the impact of schemes at a more conceptual stage, schemes that could be delivered in a number of ways, or schemes designed to deliver mode shift. Therefore, in order to reflect the Healthy Streets goals of the strategy, a new approach was developed allowing the creation and testing of a series of 'illustrative interventions', typically radical examples of possible policies. Each test was carried out independently on the 2041 core reference case. TfL learned from the illustrative tests and used this improved knowledge to inform the development of 'packages' of interventions for the draft MTS. In general, the illustrative interventions tests shown here are more extreme than the versions included in the final package modelling for the MTS.
Five illustrative intervention tests were designed to test how improved sustainable travel options, traffic reduction measures, more sustainable models of development and changing land use patterns could impact travel patterns in London and inform the wider strategy. The results of the illustrative interventions show that there is scope for further mode shift in inner and outer London beyond the core reference case, and that achieving traffic reduction will require a mixture of 'carrot' and 'stick' measures.
In order to understand the impact and effectiveness of the policies and proposals contained in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy, TfL developed a series of cumulative ‘packages’ to be tested in the strategic modelling suite
The packages drew on existing modelling of major rail and road schemes and on lessons learned from the testing of illustrative interventions. These packages are designed to pull together measures of a similar type, and represent measures to be implemented in the short, medium and long term. The packages get progressively more ambitious – starting with optimising the existing network, then expanding it, then adding new connections, and then introducing measures to reduce traffic and tackle car use. The modelling of policies and proposals concerned with the latter years of the strategy is inevitably more illustrative.
In summary:
- **Package A** is the core reference case.
- **Packages B to D** represent the totality of what can be achieved with 'carrot' measures, in other words measures designed to improve the public transport and active travel ‘offer’. • **Packages E and F** represent what more can be delivered with the introduction of measures affecting parking, freight and the way road use is paid for, that reduce traffic demand and free up space to improve the active travel and bus ‘offer’.
The MTS scenario demonstrates that the policies and proposals contained in the draft MTS can deliver the Mayor’s aims, with 80% of trips expected to be made by a sustainable mode by 2041.
The MTS scenario includes all measures tested as part of packages A to F. The analysis demonstrates that London could accommodate 5 million more trips every day by increasing the mode share for walking, cycling and public transport to 80 per cent. With the MTS, by 2041, travel will have risen by around a quarter but car travel will have fallen by around a third. There would be at least 3 million fewer car trips per day (compared to 2015) and 250,000 fewer cars owned in London. General traffic would fall by 10 to 15 per cent, a reduction of 6 million kilometres.
**Figure E1 2015 and 2041 MTS scenario mode share.**
!\[Mode Share Diagram\](source: City Planning)
The draft MTS will deliver benefits to London’s health and wellbeing, help Londoners to be more physically active, clean up London’s air and deliver Healthy Streets.
By 2041, between 3 and 5 million more trips could be made by active modes every day than in 2015 and total travel will increase by around 60 per cent on London’s buses. Bus journeys will be quick and reliable with a 10 to 15 per cent improvement in speeds and particular improvements expected in Central and inner London.
Traffic reduction and improvements in vehicle technology will deliver large scale reductions of 94 per cent in NOx and 47 per cent in PM2.5 emissions with road and rail transport on a clear trajectory to reach ‘zero carbon’ status by 2050.
**Furthermore, the significant increases in rail capacity recommended by the draft MTS will reduce crowding on public transport and unlock thousands of new homes and jobs.** Total capacity on rail and Underground services - Tube, Elizabeth Line, DLR, London Overground, Trams and National Rail - will increase by around 90 per cent, with more than 80 million additional seat kilometres between 7am and 7pm each day. Total travel will increase by nearly 100 per cent on the Tube and rail network. Despite rising passenger numbers, rail and Tube journeys will be less crowded. By 2041, crowding on rail and Underground services will reduce by around 10 to 20 per cent compared to today, measured in terms of the total crowded distance compared to the total distance travelled.
**New and enhanced public transport connections and improvements to bus speeds will mean that London residents will be better connected to jobs, services and to one another**
In total, 7.6m people will live within 45min travel time of Central London, 2.3m more than today. The number of jobs accessible to the average Londoner within 45 minutes by public transport will increase by 70 per cent. Fewer London residents will be dependent on a car to access opportunities and services. Nearly 1.8m more people will be living in places with the best transport connections, defined as areas with a public transport accessibility rating of four or above.
**Ten outcomes describe how the MTS will deliver the Mayor’s aims, transforming the streets and transport network**
Ten outcomes have been identified, reflecting the Mayor’s aims and the adoption of the Healthy Streets Approach, each incorporating several quantified measures. The outcomes describe how the strategy will mean the 80 per cent of trips are made by a sustainable mode, and how the strategy will deliver Healthy Streets and healthy people, a good public transport experience, and new homes and jobs.
These outcomes are presented overleaf and described in detail in the Mayor’s Transport Strategy supporting evidence report on Outcomes and Appraisal. Figure E2 Ten outcomes of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy.
| Healthy Streets and Healthy People | A Good Public Transport Experience | New Homes & Jobs | |-----------------------------------|-----------------------------------|------------------| | 2. London’s streets will be healthy and more Londoners will travel | 6. More people will travel on an expanded public transport network | 9. Sustainable travel will be the best option in new developments | | 3. London’s transport system will be safe & secure | 7. Public transport will be affordable and accessible to all | 10. Transport investment will unlock the delivery of new homes & jobs | | 4. London’s streets will be used more efficiently & have less traffic | 8. Journeys by public transport will be pleasant, fast and reliable | | | 5. London’s streets will be clean and green | 1. 80% of journeys will be made by sustainable modes – public transport, walking and cycling – by 2041, compared to 64% today | |
### Active
- **All Londoners to be doing a healthy level of activity through travel**
- Everyone who is able to should be sufficiently active for health through their regular travel, demonstrated by 70% of people reporting two periods of ten minutes spent walking or cycling the previous day by 2041.
### Safe
- **Walking or cycling will be the best choice for shorter journeys**
- By 2041, 70% of Londoners will live within 400m of the London-wide cycle network. The walking environment will be more appealing so that 3 to 5 million more trips could be made by active modes every day.
### Efficient
- **Aim for there to be no deaths or serious injuries on London’s streets**
- A 65% reduction in the number of people killed or seriously injured on London’s streets by 2022 (against 2000-09 levels) and a 70% reduction by 2030 (against 2010-14 levels). By 2030, no one will be killed in or by London buses.
### Green
- **Everyone will be able to feel safe and secure when travelling on the street**
- By 2041, the proportion of people who say that they don’t feel safe walking by themselves in their local area – currently one in six people – will fall, and fewer people will say that they are deterred from travelling by safety concerns.
### Connected
- **London’s transport will be on track to be zero emission by 2050**
- By 2041, there will be at least 3 million fewer daily car trips and a quarter of a million fewer cars owned in London.
### Accessible
- **Less road freight transport at peak times in central London**
- A 10% reduction in morning peak freight transport in central London by 2026.
### Quality
- **Traffic will fall and congestion will be less, allowing more efficient operations**
- Falling car ownership and use.
### Good Growth
- **The public transport network will offer new connections and more frequent services**
- A 49% reduction in road transport NOx emissions by 2041, and compliance with legal limits for NOx levels on London’s streets.
### Unlocking
- **Everyone will be able to travel spontaneously and independently**
- A 47% reduction in road transport PM10 and 36% reduction in road transport PM2.5 emissions.
### Rail and Tube journeys will be less crowded despite rising passenger volumes
- **The Mayor has frozen fares to make travel more affordable**
- By 2041, total travel will increase by around 60% on London’s buses and nearly 100% on the tube and rail network measured by passenger kilometres.
### Car dependency will be reduced and more people will live in well connected areas
- **Bus journeys will be quick and reliable – an attractive alternative to the car**
- By 2041, crowding on rail and underground services will reduce by around 10-20% compared to today, measured in terms of the total crowded distance compared to total distance travelled.
### Rail capacity to central London will increase by over 80%, with new public transport services improving connectivity and reducing crowding, enabling the delivery of new homes
- **Car speeds will improve by 10-15% London-wide by 2041, with particular improvements expected in central and inner London**
- More people will be living in places with the best transport connections.
### Crossrail 2 will provide new direct connections through central London, reducing crowding and supporting 200,000 new homes and 200,000 new jobs
- **The Bakerloo line extension will enable over 25,000 new homes and 5,000 jobs in the Old Kent Road Opportunity Area**
- An extension of the DLR to Thamesmead could enable up to 17,000 new homes and around 5,000 new jobs.
### Development will also be supported by bus service improvements
- **Transport for London will, where possible, be brought forward for development**
- By 2020/21, TfL will start on the property development sites that will deliver 10,000 homes.
## Contents
| Section | Page | |----------------------------------------------|------| | Executive Summary | 1 | | 1 Introduction | 9 | | 2 Approach to strategic modelling | 10 | | 3 2041 core reference case | 16 | | 4 Sensitivity testing | 29 | | 5 Schemes under development | 37 | | 6 Illustrative interventions | 47 | | 7 MTS package modelling | 55 | | 8 MTS Scenario | 67 | | Appendix 1 | 79 |
1. Introduction
The Mayor’s Transport Strategy is the statutory document that sets out the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan’s, policies and proposals to reshape transport in London over the next 25 years. It is an ambitious strategy that puts people’s health and quality of life at the very heart of planning the city’s transport. Along with the new London Plan and the Mayor’s other strategies for economic development, the environment, housing, health inequalities and culture, it provides the blueprint for making London a city that is not only home to more people, but is a better place for all of those people to live in.
This document sets out the options analysis and strategic modelling that has been carried out to inform strategy development and assess the effectiveness of the strategy. It is complementary to a sister report(^1) which sets out a broad range of evidence collected by TfL to identify the challenges and opportunities facing London’s transport network over the next 25 years. This report describes the potential outcomes of the policies and proposals contained in the draft MTS and is primarily informed by a programme of modelling using TfL’s suite of strategic models and supporting analytical tools.
The remainder of this report is set out as follows:
- **Chapter 2** outlines how TfL’s strategic modelling suite has been used to inform the development of the Strategy.
- **Chapter 3** summarises the results of the 2041 core reference case, a business-as-usual scenario based on current conditions and assumptions.
- **Chapter 4** documents the results of a series of sensitivity tests designed to assess uncertainty in the main drivers of travel demand in London.
- **Chapter 5** details analytical work on the case for major schemes and interventions under development by TfL. These are considered against the challenges outlined in TfL’s Challenges and Opportunities report.
- **Chapter 6** provides details on a series of illustrative intervention tests that were undertaken in order to explore the possible impacts of interventions at a more conceptual stage.
- **Chapter 7** details the results of a package modelling exercise, which put together sets of complementary proposals in order to assess their relative impacts compared to the core reference case.
- **Chapter 8** presents the results of the core Mayor’s Transport Strategy scenario, which underpins the Strategy and, in essence, is the culmination of all of the strategic modelling work outlined in Chapters 2 to 6. This scenario is a combination of the contents of all the packages and demonstrates the action required to achieve the Mayor’s vision.
______________________________________________________________________
(^1) [https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/policy/9b28c200/user_uploads/mts-challenges-and-opportunities---summary-report-final.pdf](https://consultations.tfl.gov.uk/policy/9b28c200/user_uploads/mts-challenges-and-opportunities---summary-report-final.pdf) 2. Approach to strategic modelling
Introduction
This Chapter outlines how TfL’s strategic modelling suite has been used to inform the development of the draft MTS. Firstly, it provides an overview of the role of strategic modelling as part of the draft MTS evidence base. It then steps through the overall framework, covering the development of a core reference case, testing major schemes, illustrative interventions, package modelling and, finally, a preferred MTS scenario.
TfL’s approach to strategic modelling - summary
- The MTS is an evidenced based policy document that builds on TfL’s empirical understanding of how Londoners travel today, and may travel in the future.
- Analysis has been undertaken to inform strategy development and assess the effectiveness of various policies and schemes (interventions). This analysis includes a programme of modelling, using TfL’s suite of strategic models and supporting analytical tools.
- TfL’s overall approach to forecasting future travel demand is through developing a core reference case, which includes current funded proposals for London.
- TfL have then assessed a series of alternative policies and schemes that could help to meet the challenges set out in the Challenges and Opportunities report.
- A series of ‘packages’ have been developed from these alternative policies and schemes and an assessment of their relative effectiveness carried out against the Mayor’s Vision for travel in London.
- Finally, an assessment is made of the expected outcomes for London from implementing the draft MTS policies and proposals (the preferred MTS scenario).
Role of strategic modelling
TfL’s strategic models have been used widely for forecasting the impacts of transport and land use decisions in London. This has included assessment of previous Mayor’s Transport Strategies and London Plans. The models have been comprehensively enhanced and updated for this purpose.
Figure 2.1 below shows the TfL strategic models that have been used to assess the impacts of proposals contained in the draft MTS. The role of the forecasting work for the draft MTS is threefold:
1. To establish the transport baseline or reference case impact of current plans, alongside other changes that are expected in travel behaviour and transport network performance in London.
2. To inform the policy making process by assessing different interventions and their impacts.
3. To support a strategic assessment of the plans and policies included within the draft MTS, and to assess the expected outcomes from these in the future.
Figure 2.2 below shows the overall flow of the modelling work, the stages of which are summarised in the following sections. Figure 2.2 Summary of strategic modelling approach for the draft MTS
2015 baseline Understanding of travel in London today from monitoring data
2041 core reference case and sensitivities Assessment of business as usual assumptions and uncertainty in forecasts
Schemes currently under development Assessment of schemes currently under development and sponsorship by TfL
Illustrative intervention modelling Conceptual assessment of options for changing travel behaviour
MTS Package modelling Assessment of schemes currently under development and sponsorship by TfL
Preferred MTS scenario Summary assessment of performance of the policies and proposals contained in the Draft MTS against the Mayor’s vision Core reference case
A core reference case, with scenarios up to 2041, has been produced to give a baseline for the assessment of future candidate policies and schemes for inclusion in the Strategy. This shows the change from the ‘current’ situation, i.e. the 2015 baseline and reflects a ‘business-as-usual’ assumption. The baseline for emissions is 2013 reflecting the latest version of the London Atmospheric Emissions Inventory.
The core reference case therefore includes population and employment projections from the Greater London Authority (GLA), along with funded changes to the transport network identified in the TfL Business Plan and National Rail funded plans, and wider assumptions about policies relating to aspects such as fares, fuel costs and car parking. It also includes the Mayor’s intended investment in cycling which is expected to deliver a 6 per cent cycle mode share in 2041.
Sensitivity testing
In addition, a series of sensitivities and range of outcomes are presented in Chapter 4 in recognition of the uncertainties inherent in forecasting future conditions. These include testing challenges and conclusions against ‘higher’ and ‘lower’ growth profiles, and variations in the future cost of car travel.
Treatment of schemes currently under development
Several major transport schemes are under development at TfL, but are not funded in the current TfL Business Plan. The case for these schemes has been developed over time and each is designed to meet challenges or opportunities faced by London. These schemes include amongst others:
- Crossrail 2;
- London Suburban Metro;
- plans for mini-radial hubs and improved orbital rail links;
- Bakerloo Line extensions;
- Silvertown Tunnel;
- the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ); and
- upgrades to the deep Tube lines and increasing frequencies on DLR, Trams and the Elizabeth Line.
These schemes have been assessed as part of the package modelling for the draft MTS. Station upgrades and other schemes supported by partners such as the Department for Transport (DfT) and Network Rail have been included as part of the package modelling but have not been separately assessed.
Illustrative interventions
To inform the development of the draft MTS, a series of illustrative interventions have been tested as part of a conceptual assessment of options and mechanisms for changing travel behaviour. The tests involved assessing the sensitivity of travel in London to various supply and demand changes. They were used to inform policy development and, ultimately, to help form a series of package tests, which build towards a final MTS scenario.
**MTS package modelling**
In order to understand the impact and effectiveness of the policies and proposals contained in the draft MTS, TfL developed a series of cumulative package tests which build on the 2041 core reference case. The packages drew on existing modelling of major rail and road schemes and on the illustrative intervention testing. The packages are designed to pull together measures of a similar type based on effect and cost, and represent measures to be implemented in the short, medium and long term. The packages get progressively more ambitious, starting with optimising the existing network, then expanding it, then adding new connections, and then introducing measures to manage demand and encourage the uptake of green technology. Figure 2.3 shows the MTS package model tests.
**Figure 2.3 MTS package model tests.**
**Package A** is the core 2041 core reference case including funded programmes.
**Packages B to D** assess increasing levels of investment in public transport and Healthy Streets. These include road space reallocation to sustainable modes, bus and rail schemes. These packages are designed to improve the public transport and active travel ‘offer’.
**Packages E and F** present the potential impact of further road space reallocation, traffic reduction measures and longer term changes to the way road use is paid. for. These packages assess how traffic demand can be further reduced to free up space to improve the active travel and bus ‘offer’.
**The preferred MTS scenario outcomes**
Eight key quantified measures have been used to assess the impact of the core reference case on travel conditions in London. These are also used to assess the relative impact of the sensitivity and package modelling carried out subsequently against the core reference case. The quantified measures are as follows:
1. Mode share for walking, cycling and public transport, by area of London.
2. Vehicle kilometres (motorised road vehicles).
3. Congestion for road traffic (traffic speed).
4. Bus speeds.
5. Public transport usage (passenger kilometres travelled).
6. Rail crowding.
7. Emissions – CO₂, NOₓ, PM₂.₅ and PM₁₀.
8. Connectivity provided by the transport network.
Finally, the proposals and policies included in the draft MTS have been tested to assess how they perform against the eight key quantified measures above, and, ultimately, against the Mayor’s vision for London through to 2041. 3. The 2041 core reference case
Introduction
This chapter describes the core reference case, which sets out expected conditions for travel in London in 2041, given funded schemes and consideration of the most likely set of other conditions affecting travel demand.
It first describes the key assumptions behind the core reference case. It then summarises the outcomes of this scenario against the eight key quantified measures described in Chapter 2 of this report.
2041 core reference case - summary
- London’s population is expected to grow from 8.6 million people in 2015 to 10.5 million in 2041. Employment is expected to grow from 5.5 million jobs in 2015 to 6.7 million in 2041.
- TfL has developed a core reference case for 2041 which incorporates this growth in population and employment, together with assumptions around likely economic changes, and the funded schemes in the TfL Business Plan and on National Rail. This reflects a ‘business-as-usual’ scenario based on current conditions and assumptions.
- Under such assumptions, there would be at least an extra 5 million more trips every day in London, and the sustainable mode share would be expected to increase from 64 to 70 per cent by 2041.
- Despite the falling car mode share, without further action traffic will rise. There are also expected to be significant decreases in average vehicle speeds across the road network.
- The core reference case projects a greater than 70 per cent increase in demand for rail modes, with a smaller increase in bus usage. Demand is projected to increase faster than supply on the rail networks from 2021, so that by 2041 there would be severe crowding on the rail network.
- While NOx emissions would significantly reduce as a result of the implementation of the Ultra Low Emission Zone and the role out of newer vehicles, London would not comply with legal limits for NO2 until 2025 and will exceed World Health Organisation recommended maximum levels of PM2.5 until after 2030.
- Carbon Dioxide (CO2) emissions from road transport are forecast to reduce by around 50 per cent in 2050 compared to 2013; this would not be sufficient to achieve the Mayor’s ambition for a zero carbon London by 2050.
Description of the 2041 core reference case
The core reference case includes funded public transport and highway schemes and likely changes in London’s land use and economy. It assumes the latest available projections of population and employment from the GLA as well as Government assumptions on changes in the wider economy, and current funded schemes. A scheme list is provided in Appendix 1 and a summary of key schemes is provided below:
- Current view of funded National Rail(^2) schemes, HLOS programme, Thameslink programme, HS2, West Anglia and Great Western improvements.
- The opening of the Elizabeth Line in 2019, the Northern Line Extension and Tube upgrades to the Victoria, Jubilee, Northern and Sub Surface Lines.
- DLR, Trams, London Overground and bus service improvements.
- TfL’s Road Modernisation Plan, cycling infrastructure schemes and the introduction by 2020 of the Central London Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ).
Wider assumptions have been made about policies relating to aspects such as fares, fuel costs and car parking.
**Key forecasting assumptions**
Table 3.1 lists key demographic and economic assumptions and Table 3.2 provides greater detail on the population and employment forecasts that are included in the 2041 reference case. Population and employment forecasts are provided for the Central Activities Zone (CAZ) which is London’s vibrant centre, the remainder of inner London, and outer London.
**Table 3.1 Key demographic and employment assumptions for the core reference case to 2041.**
| Assumption | Comments | Source | |-----------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------| | London Population | London’s population is projected to grow by approximately 2 million to 10.5 million in 2041 | GLA | | London Employment | London’s employment is projected to grow by approximately 1.2 million to 6.7 million in 2041 | GLA | | Parking supply and charges | Work place parking supply is expected to decrease from 2015 to 2041 and parking charges are expected to increase significantly reflecting recent trends and expected continued pressure on parking | TfL | | Car ownership | Car ownership is expected to decrease in line with increasing population densities to an average of 0.29 cars per person in 2041 | TfL | | Economic assumptions | Highway and public transport economic assumptions are taken from WebTAG(^3) December 2015 guidance | DfT | | Public Transport fares | The Mayor’s Fares Freeze applies to TfL fares, with other fares assumed to increase with inflation until 2020. An inflation-linked increase is assumed from 2021. | TfL |
______________________________________________________________________
(^2) ‘National Rail’ refers to rail services franchised by the DfT and not in current TfL control. It includes Crossrail 2 in statistics where the scheme is in place.
(^3) [https://www.gov.uk/guidance/transport-analysis-guidance-webtag](https://www.gov.uk/guidance/transport-analysis-guidance-webtag) Table 3.2 Population and employment distribution and forecast growth.
| | Population | | Employment | | |----------|------------|----------|------------|----------| | | 2015 (m) | 2041 (m) | 2015 (%) | 2041 (%) | | CAZ | 0.2 | 0.3 | 3 | 3 | | Inner (excl. CAZ) | 3.2 | 3.9 | 37 | 38 | | Outer | 5.2 | 6.2 | 60 | 59 | | Total | 8.6 | 10.5 | 100 | 100 |
| | 2015 (m) | 2041 (m) | 2015 (%) | 2041 (%) | |----------|------------|----------|------------|----------| | CAZ | 1.9 | 2.3 | 35 | 34 | | Inner (excl. CAZ) | 1.5 | 1.9 | 26 | 28 | | Outer | 2.2 | 2.5 | 39 | 37 | | Total | 5.5 | 6.7 | 100 | 100 |
Source: Greater London Authority.
Performance of the 2041 reference case
This section briefly sets out the performance of the 2041 reference case in terms of the eight key quantified measures summarised in Chapter 2.
Travel demand and mode share
Population and employment are key drivers of travel. Travel demand is therefore expected to increase in proportion to the growth in population and employment shown in Table 3.1.
Demand for travel in London is forecast to increase by 5 million trips per day, from around 27 million trips per day in the 2015 baseline to around 32 million trips per day in 2041. This represents a 20 per cent increase in trips from 2015 to 2041.
Alongside this growth in overall travel demand, mode share is also expected to change, with the majority of additional trips forecast to be by public transport or active travel, with only a small increase in car trips – reflecting the mix of funded interventions to 2041. As a result of this, the car mode share is projected to fall from 36 per cent in 2015 to 30 per cent in 2041. This is summarised in Figure 3.3. The distribution of travel demand spatially across London is likely to continue to change. Figure 3.4 shows the mode share and number of trips made between Central, inner and outer London and the rest of the country, for both 2015 and the 2041 core reference cases. The share of travel by private car is forecast to reduce for all of these types of movement. Figure 3.4 Daily trip volumes and distribution by mode, 2015 and 2041 core reference
Source: City Planning Traffic volumes and road congestion
Overall road traffic volumes are expected to grow modestly, at a rate slower than population growth. Figure 3.5 shows that traffic volumes are expected to fall in Central London as a result of reduced highway capacity and increased sustainable transport use, with growth concentrated in outer London where there are fewer public transport options and car ownership and use is less constrained. Growth here is primarily driven by a rising population and growth in van traffic, which will form an increasing proportion of total motorised vehicle traffic.
Highway capacity for general traffic is lower in the core reference case as a result of the growth in cycling and a range of other changes, including pedestrian priority and public realm schemes, which remove capacity for general road traffic. This, combined with increases in population and employment, means that congestion is expected to increase. Overall vehicle speeds are expected to decrease by up to 25 per cent in Central London from 2015 levels (Figure 3.6), with average vehicle speeds decreasing across London.
Figure 3.5 Percentage change in morning peak vehicle kilometres, 2015 to 2041 core reference case.
Source: City Planning Figure 3.6 Morning peak vehicle speeds by area (kilometres/hour), 2015 and 2041 core reference case
Source: City Planning Public transport usage
Strong growth in demand for public transport, particularly for rail based modes, is expected between 2015 and 2041. Forecasts show a 54 per cent increase in rail and Underground(^4) boardings and a 57 per cent increase in rail and Underground passenger kilometres in London between 2015 and 2041, resulting from London’s growth and supported by extra capacity on the networks such as the opening of the Elizabeth Line. Figure 3.7 shows the projected change in public transport passenger kilometres between 2015 and the 2041 reference case.
**Figure 3.7 Percentage change in 12 hour passenger kilometres by sub mode, 2015 to 2041 core reference case.**
Source: City Planning
Under current plans, bus patronage growth is forecast to be lower than rail growth, reflecting the expected impact of new rail capacity in Central London on bus demand. The TfL Business Plan proposes a reallocation of bus services from Central to inner and outer London.
**Bus speeds**
The change in bus speeds from 2015 for the reference case is shown in Figure 3.8. As road traffic slows, there is a detrimental impact on bus speeds. Unmitigated, planned changes to the road network in Central London would reduce general traffic and bus speeds. London wide bus speeds are projected to reduce, from an average of 14.4 kilometres per hour in 2015 to 13.8 kilometres per hour by 2041 in the reference case.
______________________________________________________________________
(^4) ‘Rail and Underground’ or ‘Tube and rail’ refers to all rail services in London including Tube, Elizabeth Line, DLR, London Overground, Trams and National Rail. These supply issues are likely to result in reduced bus passenger kilometres in Central London and modest growth in inner London, as shown in Figure 3.9. Bus usage is expected to broadly keep pace with population growth in outer London.
Source: City Planning Public transport crowding
Demand for rail services will continue to rise after completion of the currently funded investment programme. Demand for public transport is projected to increase faster than supply from 2021. Therefore crowding will worsen without further investment. Figure 3.10 shows that, from 2015 to 2041, passenger kilometres travelled in severely crowded conditions (defined as links with more than 4 passengers standing per square metre) are expected to increase - by 50 per cent on the Tube and DLR, and 90 per cent on National Rail.
Figure 3.10 Morning peak passenger kilometres exceeding a standing passenger density of four people per square metre on rail services in London, 2015 to 2041 core reference case.
Source: City Planning
Figure 3.11 shows expected crowding levels in 2041 with funded investment and highlights that much of the Tube and rail network would experience crowding such that it would be effectively full throughout the entire morning peak. Figure 3.11 Morning peak crowding on rail and underground services in London, 2041 core reference case Emissions and air quality
With the planned Ultra Low Emission Zone in place in 2020 in Central London, together with improvements to vehicular technology, levels of the four key emissions (CO₂, PM₂.₅, PM₁₀ and NOₓ) are expected to fall. In particular, there is projected to be a reduction of over 85 per cent in NOₓ emissions across London by 2041 in the core reference case.
Figure 3.12 shows the modelled change in emissions of NOₓ, particulate matter (PM₁₀ and PM₂.₅) and CO₂ from road vehicles between 2013 and 2041, according to the reference case. Emissions of NOₓ reduce in the short term as Euro 6 / VI vehicles are adopted. Further reductions in emissions occur as taxis convert to zero emission capable (ZEC) vehicles and electric and hydrogen buses are deployed. The majority of transport PM₁₀ and PM₂.₅ emissions are caused by vehicle tyre and brake wear. As such, following an initial reduction in exhaust PM emissions through adoption of Euro 6 / VI vehicles, emissions are projected to increase in line with additional vehicle kilometres to 2041.
Carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions reduce steadily due to the transition to ZEC taxis, electric and hydrogen buses and some uptake of ultra-low emission cars and light vans in private vehicle fleets. Some improvements in HGV efficiency reduce emissions further. Carbon dioxide arising from the generation of electricity to charge of electric vehicles represents a larger component of emissions as uptake of electric vehicles increases; it is assumed that the carbon intensity of the National Grid reduces in line with government forecasts.
Figure 3.12 London wide emissions from road traffic, 2013 to 2041 core reference case
Source: City Planning Connectivity
Public transport connectivity can be measured in terms of the number of jobs that can be reached from each area of London within 45 minutes public transport travel time. This is an important aspect of the connectivity of residential locations. Similar analysis can be carried out to assess the labour market catchment of employment locations.
Figure 3.13 shows the change in access to jobs within 45 minutes brought about by improvements to public transport services in the core reference case. The assessment only considers travel time changes rather than the impact of new jobs. It shows the impacts of the Elizabeth Line, the funded Tube upgrades and other National Rail schemes. Some areas, such as Abbey Wood and Newham, currently less well connected to the jobs market, gain access to up to one million extra jobs. By contrast Central London shows less significant change because this area is already served by a well-connected public transport network. The change would be greater if the additional impacts of employment growth were taken into account.
Figure 3.13 Change in public transport connectivity, 2015 to 2041 core reference case.
Source: City Planning 4. Sensitivity testing
Introduction
This chapter describes a series of sensitivity tests undertaken in relation to the core reference case, designed to assess uncertainty in the forecasting of future travel patterns and network conditions. These sensitivities are informed by previous work, including TfL’s report: ‘Drivers of Demand for Travel in London: A review of trends in travel demand and their causes’(^5), which identified important factors that have contributed to change in travel demand over the past decades.
It first describes the sources of uncertainty in travel demand in the context of growth, behaviour and technological change. It then describes TfL’s approach to sensitivity testing and concludes with high level results of these tests in terms of the impact on trips, traffic volumes and public transport demand.
Sensitivity testing - summary
- TfL has developed an approach which recognises the intrinsic uncertainty in forecasting future travel demand and which seeks to understand how changes to the assumptions that form the basis of the reference case could change the nature or extent of the challenges facing the transport network.
- Uncertainty increases as the planning horizon moves further into the future, and as it becomes harder to predict how technology, the environment, lifestyle and travel preferences may change.
- A set of five modelled sensitivity tests have been assessed to reflect the range of likely changes to population, the economy and employment, and to the cost of car and public transport use. They provide a useful range of plausible outcomes against which to assess proposals and schemes.
- The results show that the broad conclusions of the core reference case, including rapid growth in public transport use, walking and cycling and a modest decline in car use but rising traffic and congestion are a robust basis on which to plan.
- More radical changes are of course possible, and could change the case for individual schemes and policies. These have been assessed on a qualitative basis.
Uncertainty in forecasting
All forecasting must accept that the future is inherently uncertain and that this uncertainty increases as we look further into the future. Robust assessment involves understanding how different trends or circumstances could alter the challenges facing London and the policies and schemes designed to tackle these challenges. There are several sources of uncertainty in future travel demand, including uncertainty in growth forecasts, changes in travel behaviour/preferences and other external and technological changes.
(^5) http://content.tfl.gov.uk/drivers-of-demand-for-travel-in-london.pdf Uncertainty in growth forecasts
Economic growth, the relative success of London and its place in the world, and the location of population and employment all have a direct impact on travel demand. The number of people and jobs in London is a major factor driving total travel demand. The current projections assume continued strong growth, reflecting a continuation of London’s success, but a review of historic trends suggests that this is properly subject to some uncertainty.
Spatial distribution of population and employment
The geographical location of population and employment is important for mode share, as people who live and work in inner London make far fewer car trips than those in outer London. The trends in population movement have varied significantly over past decades. Demographics (population structure) are also important. Projections assume a rise in the number of older adults living in London, as well as changes to birth rates over time, both which would have a significant impact on patterns of travel demand.
Uncertainty in travel behaviour and preferences
There is substantial evidence in London that patterns of travel demand have evolved significantly over recent decades. Some of the changes observed have suggested a movement away from what might be regarded as conventional transport planning assumptions, primarily those which assume that rising incomes lead fairly directly to more car use. This is evidenced by the substantial net shift in mode share, away from car and towards public transport, walking and cycling, observed in London since 2000, despite population and economic growth.
If people travelled today as they did in 1991 there would be almost 2 million more car trips a day in London and over 2 million fewer public transport trips. However, most of this change is attributable to changing land use, population change and the costs of travel and not fundamentally different travel preferences.
There have, however, also been trends in some ‘lifestyle choices’ such as the growth of cycling to work, which may reflect a more fundamental change in travel preferences. There is considerable uncertainty about long term trends in these elements.
Uncertainty in technology changes and adoption
Technology development, reflecting for example the expected development of autonomous vehicles, has the potential to radically change travel demand patterns. Most mainstream travel forecasts used for appraisal do not plan for a significant change in travel behaviour as a result of technology change, in part reflecting great uncertainty about how technologies could develop and whether and how they would impact on travel demand or behaviour. However, the potential for significant change does exist and it is important to have regard to these in designing travel forecasts for the long term. TfL’s approach to assessing sensitivities
TfL has developed an approach which recognises the inherent uncertainty in forecasting. Robust assessment involves understanding how changes in the assumptions that form future reference cases could influence schemes and policies as well as the core challenge. TfL’s approach is to vary the input assumptions in modelling, rather than changing the modelled relationships themselves.
Emerging trends in which there is greater confidence, such as the growth in cycling, are reflected in the core reference case. Other aspects of uncertainty have been tested through sensitivity tests, which are summarised in the ‘Wheel of Uncertainty’ shown in Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1 Wheel of uncertainty
Source: City Planning The inner ring of this diagram comprises a set of five modelled sensitivities. These modelled scenarios vary input assumptions to reflect a range of likely population and employment levels, and to assumptions around the cost of car and public transport use. They therefore provide a useful range of likely outcomes from which to assess schemes. Where strategic modelling is required to take forward a specific scheme or proposal, an assessment will be undertaken against the most relevant of the sensitivities.
The outer ring is a set of four more radical and less predictable sensitivities. It is not expected that these will be necessarily modelled, but reference to their potential impact should be included within the strategic case for a scheme.
These sensitivities give an understanding of the varying transport challenge and identify if proposals have a better or worse case under alternative assumptions. For example:
- Does the case for a scheme depend only on the highest projection of population and employment growth or is it required in all likely futures?
- What effect might sustained low fuel prices have on mode share and will this mean that a traffic reduction proposal will not achieve the desired reduction in congestion?
Identifying challenges and assessing a scheme in a variety of future scenarios addresses the inherent uncertainty in forecasting and provides a more robust basis for assessment.
Five sensitivities have been assessed for this report:
1. Higher short term output growth leading to increased population and employment in London and resultant changes in car ownership.
2. Lower short term output growth leading to reduced population and employment in London and resultant changes in car ownership.
3. a) Car ownership rates remain unchanged from 2011 census levels rather than continuing decline linked to density increases.
4. b) A 20 per cent increase in fuel costs relative to Government assumptions.
5. A 10 per cent reduction in discretionary trip rates from 2011 rates linked to increased digital shopping and leisure activities. Sensitivity test results
The impacts of the sensitivity tests are reported by adding ranges (shown by the vertical lines) to the point forecasts from the 2041 core reference case (shown with green triangles).
Figure 4.2 shows that under all sensitivity reference case scenarios, London would expect to see mode shift away from car to walking, cycling and public transport. Car trips are expected to grow by between -1 per cent and 8 per cent, indicating that car trips per person in London will continue to fall in future.
**Figure 4.2 Range of percentage growth in trips by mode, 2015 to 2041.**
Source: City Planning
Figure 4.3 indicates that with funded investment, all sensitivities support significant growth in rail and underground use and growth in bus use. Under these moderate assumptions growth could vary by 10 percentage points by sub mode. Figure 4.3 Range of percentage growth in passenger kilometres by mode, 2015 to 2041.
Source: City Planning
Figure 4.4 and figure 4.5 show ranges in vehicle and car kilometres by functional area of London. In all scenarios, car and vehicle traffic is expected to decline in Central London. Growth in inner and outer London is more dependent on assumptions about car ownership, fuel prices and changes in discretionary travel. Overall car traffic is expected to grow but by less than around 5 per cent with all vehicle traffic growing by between 6 and 10 per cent. The above results show that the broad conclusions of the core reference case, including rapid growth in public transport use, walking and cycling, flat or declining car use but rising traffic and congestion are robust under a wide range of plausible sensitivities and are therefore a sound basis on which to plan for the future. More radical changes
More radical changes are possible, including radical changes to London’s economy, or changes to the automation of vehicles and new models of car ownership and use. The impacts of these changes are too uncertain to be assessed through the use of models at this point, but it will be important to continue to monitor the evolution of such changes and take them into account as necessary.
One such example could be the wide scale adoption of individual autonomous vehicles. These could have a significant impact on highway capacity in London. If cars could run closer together and enhance capacity, with the same volume of traffic then congestion could reduce. Conversely, empty vehicles returning home or circling after dropping off a passenger could have the opposite effect and create further congestion across London. Similarly, if automation had the effect of making it cheaper or easier to travel by car, then car use would be likely to rise. Different trajectories in the development of connected autonomous vehicles could lead to very different outcomes for London.
The draft MTS discusses the uncertainty surrounding connected and autonomous vehicles and the measures that may be needed to ensure the technology evolves in the best interests of London. 5. Schemes under development
Introduction
This chapter details the analytical work undertaken to explore the case for major schemes and interventions under development by TfL, but are not funded in the current TfL Business Plan, for potential inclusion in the draft MTS. For each major scheme it summarises the rationale for the scheme, the detail of the scheme, and its effectiveness.
Schemes under development - summary
- TfL are developing a series of schemes to meet London’s transport challenges. These schemes are an important part of delivering the Mayor’s vision for travel in London.
- **Crossrail 2** will carry up to 30 trains an hour in each direction on the southwest to northeast corridor, relieving severe crowding and unlocking around 200,000 additional homes and supporting 200,000 new jobs.
- A **London Suburban Metro** would offer improved frequencies, journey times and interchange opportunities, so that 125,000 more people could travel into central London in the morning peak and 38,000 more people could travel on non-radial services around inner and outer London.
- **Mini-radial networks to London’s town centres** can create interchange hubs; linked together they allow orbital rail trips, relieving crowding and enabling mode shift from the car, offering reliable and fast public transport to local destinations.
- The **Bakerloo Line extension** would deliver an increase in frequency on the Bakerloo Line to 33 trains per hour, providing the capacity for 65,000 more journeys in the morning and evening peaks, and could unlock 25,000 new homes and 5,000 new jobs.
- The **Silvertown tunnel** will provide a reliable and resilient cross-river road link, enabling new bus links, delivering at least 20 buses per hour in the opening year.
- The **Ultra Low Emission Zone** covers the area of the Congestion Charging Zone and introduces a daily charge for vehicles that don’t meet required emissions standards. Subject to consultation, the original September 2020 start date for the Central London ULEZ is being brought forward to April 2019. As a result of the ULEZ, 42 per cent fewer people in central London would be living in areas exceeding the legal limits for NO₂ concentrations.
- **Further upgrades to the Tube, DLR, Trams and Elizabeth line** would increase morning peak capacity in 2041 by 26 per cent, significantly reducing crowding. Schemes under development
Several major transport schemes are under development at TfL. The case for these schemes has been developed over time and each is designed to meet challenges or opportunities faced by London. The case for each scheme forms part of the initial work for the MTS package modelling. The schemes considered here are as follows:
- Crossrail 2;
- London Suburban Metro;
- Mini-radial hubs and improved orbital rail links;
- Bakerloo Line extension to Lewisham and beyond;
- Silvertown Tunnel and associated bus services;
- ULEZ; and
- TfL unfunded frequency and capacity upgrades.
The following sections set out the case for each scheme, including how it maps to challenges and opportunities for London, give a description of the scheme itself and consider its overall effectiveness in meeting the transport challenge. Crossrail 2
What is planned?
- Crossrail 2 involves connecting existing national rail lines in Surrey and Hertfordshire with two new 37km tunnels from Wimbledon to Tottenham Hale and New Southgate, carrying up to 30 trains per hour in each direction. It will boost total rail capacity by 10 per cent and rail capacity across it in the critical south west corridor by 40 per cent.
- The new Crossrail 2 line will connect with eight underground lines, the London Overground, the Elizabeth line, HS2 and national and international rail services (Figure 5.1).
Figure 5.1: Crossrail 2 route (2015 consultation) How effective is it?
- Crossrail 2 will relieve the Victoria, Northern and Piccadilly lines, and will remove the need for planned station control at the Underground stations serving 5 of the 6 busiest National Rail termini, as well as vital interchanges such as Clapham Junction and Vauxhall in the south, and Highbury & Islington, Finsbury Park, Seven Sisters and Tottenham Hale in the north (Figure 5.2).
- Furthermore, by addressing congestion at Euston, it will support High Speed 2’s integration into London’s transport network.
- To address critical crowding challenges on the South West Main Line, Crossrail 2 will create the space for around 20 extra local and regional trains per hour and 10 further additional trains per hour to serve the corridor from Wimbledon inwards. Capacity released will also allow several new long-distance services to cities such as Portsmouth and Southampton, and key locations for housing and business growth.
- Crossrail 2 will transform connectivity to key Growth Areas in northeast London. The West Anglia Main Line is currently the busiest mixed-traffic two-track railway in the country. Crossrail 2 will four-track this railway, quadrupling service frequencies to some destinations in the Upper Lea Valley, and shorter journey times across the wider London-Stansted-Cambridge Corridor will be possible.
- Crossrail 2 will unlock around 200,000 new homes along the line of the route and support 200,000 new jobs across the region. Around 40 per cent of transport benefits and more than 30 per cent of new housing will be realised in areas outside London.
Figure 5.2: Forecast key station performance with Crossrail 2, 2041, AM and PM peaks London Suburban Metro
What is planned?
- A London Suburban Metro would deliver increased frequencies and improved rolling stock to increase capacity on local train services on the South Eastern, South Western and South Central lines.
- A London Suburban Metro (Figure 5.3) could be delivered by the late 2020s.
Figure 5.3: Proposed London suburban metro in south London
How effective is it?
- South London relies on its suburban rail network for connectivity to central London. However, there is a substantial and growing gap between the level of service that can be offered on National Rail in south London, and the frequency and reliability now offered on the Tube and bus network.
- Creating a TfL London Suburban Metro could significantly increase capacity by over a third in peak periods, allowing approximately 125,000 additional passengers to travel to central London in the morning peak.
- This could deliver peak period capacity increases on suburban services of around two thirds at Victoria and Charing Cross and a half at Cannon Street due to higher service frequencies and longer/improved rolling stock.
- 38,000 more people could travel on non-radial services around inner and outer London. Mini-radial hubs and improved orbital rail links
What is planned?
- Service changes and potential orbital extensions to create an improved orbital railway for inner and outer London.
- Enhanced strategic interchanges at Clapham Junction, Lewisham, Old Oak Common and Stratford are shown in Figure 5.4.
Figure 5.4: Potential mini-radial hubs and improved orbital links
How effective is it?
- Orbital rail and station interchange improvements reduce journey times and improve connectivity in inner and outer London with the potential to deliver sustainable growth.
- Pressure on London Underground and bus services is relieved, with a public transport mode shift onto orbital rail services and a decrease in crowding across all public transport modes (Figure 5.5).
Figure 5.5: Change in passenger kilometres & crowded hours, 2041 Bakerloo Line Extension to Lewisham and beyond (BLE)
What is planned?
- Extending the Bakerloo line from Elephant and Castle to Lewisham, with interchanges with Overground, DLR and National Rail services at New Cross Gate and Lewisham (Figure 5.6). This would deliver an increase in frequency on the Bakerloo Line to 33 trains per hour.
Figure 5.6: Proposed Bakerloo Line Extension
How effective is it?
- The Bakerloo extension would unlock 25,000 new homes and 5,000 new jobs in the Old Kent Road and the Lewisham, Catford and New Cross Opportunity Areas.
- There are significant improvements to journey times, with Lewisham to central journey times decreasing by up to 9 minutes.
- Capacity is significantly improved with additional capacity on the London Underground for 65,000 journeys in the morning peak and evening peak.
- Access to jobs and services are improved, with up to 2.6 million jobs becoming 10 minutes closer for areas served by the Bakerloo Line Extension.
- The Bakerloo Line Extension would also provide crowding relief on National Rail and rail termini by providing an alternative route into London, and on local bus services by providing local London underground capacity.
- The significantly improved connectivity to the Overground, DLR and National Rail services mean that Lewisham and New Cross Gate become even more attractive public transport gateways and interchange hubs. Silvertown Tunnel and associated bus services
What is planned?
- Construction of a new dual two carriageway highway tunnel under the River Thames between the Greenwich Peninsula and Silvertown (Figure 5.7). The tunnel is proposed to be charged for general traffic and includes a dedicated bus/coach and HGV lane in each direction to provide at least 20 cross-river buses per hour in the opening year.
Figure 5.7: Potential bus routes enabled by the Silvertown Tunnel
How effective is it?
- The Silvertown tunnel would effectively eliminate the severe congestion that routinely affects the Blackwall Tunnel, improving journey time reliability and increasing the resilience of the strategic road network. This would deliver journey time savings of up to 20 minutes at peak times.
- The number of closures at the Blackwall Tunnel is expected to reduce significantly, particularly those caused by over-height vehicles (which typically result in over 1,000 unplanned closures each year).
- The tunnel would enable a transformation of the cross-river bus network, improving public transport connectivity and capacity in growth areas including the Royal Docks and the Greenwich Peninsula.
- It would make east and south-east London more attractive for inward investment by improving cross-river access for businesses, with 3,000 new jobs expected to be created by 2041 as a result of the scheme.
- The scheme ‘locks in’ the benefits through user charging, which means that there will be minimal changes to overall levels of travel in the area. ULEZ 2019
What is planned?
- The central Ultra Low Emissions Zone (ULEZ) covers the same area as the Congestion Charging Zone. A daily charge (7 days a week) of £12.50 for light vehicles and £100 for heavy vehicles will be applied for vehicles that do not meet the relevant standard (Euro 4 for petrol and Euro 6 for diesel).
- Subject to consultation, the original September 2020 start date for the central ULEZ is being brought forward to April 2019. This is ahead of a series of expansions London-wide for heavy vehicles in 2020 and across Inner London for light vehicles in 2021. The implementation plan is shown in Figure 5.8.
Figure 5.8: Ultra Low Emission Zone proposals
How effective is it?
- As a result of implementing the ULEZ in central London sooner, road transport NOx emissions in central London are expected to reduce by 20 per cent in 2019.
- The area of central London exceeding legal limit values for NO2 would reduce from 30 per cent to 22 per cent and 42 per cent fewer people in central London would be living in areas exceeding the legal limits for NO2 concentrations.
- There will also be ‘knock on’ benefits outside central London as a result of cleaner vehicles passing through inner and outer London to access central London.
- There are benefits in reducing exposure to air pollution by introducing ULEZ 17 months earlier, for example reducing the risk of hospital admissions for heart and lung conditions worsening symptoms and severity of asthma. Upgrades to the TfL managed rail and Underground network
What is planned?
- Tube: Increased capacity and frequency on the Central (37 trains per hour (tph)), Jubilee (36tph), Northern (towards 36tph), Piccadilly (36tph), Waterloo & City (30tph), and Bakerloo Lines (26tph).
- Elizabeth line: increased service frequency to 30 trains per hour.
- DLR: increased frequency to 30 trains per hour.
- Trams: increased frequency to 7.5 trains per hour on all routes.
How effective is it?
- The improvements significantly increase morning peak capacity in 2041 by 26 per cent across the London network, with 1 per cent arising from Tram improvements, 4 per cent from DLR improvements, 16 per cent from London Underground improvements and 6 per cent from the Elizabeth line frequency increase.
- The increase in capacity significantly reduces crowding across TfL’s train network in London. On average, the expected proportion of passenger kilometres travelled in London in crowded conditions in the morning peak (greater than 4 people per square metre) is reduced from above 50 per cent to 35 per cent. Impacts by mode are shown in Figure 5.9.
Figure 5.9: Proportion of passenger kilometres in 2041 morning peak in severely crowded conditions (>4 person per square metre) 6. Exploration of illustrative interventions
Introduction
This chapter describes a series of illustrative intervention tests undertaken in order to inform the development of draft MTS proposals. It first summarises the rationale and contents of the illustrative interventions. It then describes the key results of each test and concludes with a summary of outcomes and lessons from the work. These lessons are then taken forward into the MTS scenario forecasting exercise described in section 7 of this report.
It is important to recognise that these conceptual tests are designed to draw out the impacts of a specific range of interventions for the purpose of further analysis, and they do not of themselves reflect preferred or proposed packages of measures.
Illustrative interventions - summary
- Illustrative interventions are conceptual, modelled scenarios designed to assess policy options for changing travel behaviour.
- Some challenges set out in the Challenges and Opportunities report will require policies and interventions beyond schemes set out in Chapter 5 to meet the Mayor’s vision.
- Five illustrative intervention tests were designed to test how improvements to sustainable modes, traffic reduction measures, conceptual connectivity schemes and changing land use could impact travel patterns in London and inform the wider strategy.
- The illustrative interventions show that there is scope for further mode shift in inner and outer London beyond the core reference case, but to achieve traffic and congestion reduction will require a mixture of ‘carrot’ and ‘stick’ approaches, including traffic reduction measures in the longer term.
- The results from analysis described in Chapters 5 and 6 have been used to inform and develop the MTS package tests in Chapter 7.
Illustrative interventions scenarios
Chapter 5 details the analytical work for major transport schemes under development at TfL. However, meeting the challenges set out in the Challenges and Opportunities report, and delivering the Healthy Streets Approach will require further policies and interventions. Five illustrative intervention tests were designed to test how improving sustainable modes, traffic reduction measures, conceptual connectivity schemes and changing land use could impact on travel patterns in London and inform the wider strategy. The tests are in some cases not geographically specific and instead provide a sense of scale for the potential impact of policy measures focused on achieving mode shift in inner and outer London.
Lessons from the illustrative interventions have been taken forward into the package tests in Chapter 7. Table 6.1 summarises the rationale and contents of each illustrative intervention test. Table 6.1 Summary of illustrative intervention tests
| Scenario | Description | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 1. Bus connectivity package in inner and outer London | Testing London-wide bus priority, frequency and quality improvements for their ability to deliver more sustainable growth and impact mode share, connectivity and congestion levels. | | 2. 15 per cent cycling mode share | Testing an exogenous increase in cycling to 15% of all trips and assessing the likely impact on public transport crowding and use, and highway congestion. | | 3. Opportunity areas and town centres – sustainable growth | A set of public transport connectivity and parking based traffic reduction measures applied in opportunity areas and town centres. This is to understand if Central London mode shares could be achieved in new developments in inner and outer London. | | 4. Changing the way road use is paid for | Testing a London wide distance-based charge to assess potential traffic reductions, congestion relief, environmental benefits and mode shift to walking, cycling and public transport. | | 5. Focused population growth | Testing an alternative land use distribution with all population growth in areas with greater public transport connectivity. Assessing how this could impact mode share, achieve vehicle kilometres reductions and reduce congestion. |
Results from the illustrative interventions
The following provides more detail on each illustrative intervention, briefly setting out why the intervention was tested; what was tested; how its performance was assessed, and the overall effects and effectiveness of the illustrative policy measures.
1. Bus connectivity package in inner and outer London
Why is this being tested? To understand the potential demand for improved bus services and to explore the role of buses in delivering mode share from the car.
What is being tested? Testing a number of measures including bus priority, bus frequency and the quality of buses. Each of these is expected to make buses more attractive.
How has the illustrative intervention been assessed? A number of measures to improve buses were tested. These included a 20 per cent improvement in bus speeds in inner and outer London from a 2011 base and speeds as in 2011 in Central London. Bus frequency increases in line with population growth within London. Improvements in bus quality so that buses are perceived by customers to be more like Tube services within the modelling assessment.
How effective is it? Improving bus connectivity and quality significantly increases bus usage with a 65 per cent increase in bus passenger kilometres and only small reductions in Tube and National Rail usage. The percentage increase in bus usage is greater than the increase in bus vehicle kilometres applied. This suggests that improving bus speeds and service quality could generate demand and increase the efficiency of the bus network. Some trips come from the car but more come from active modes, reflecting the distribution of those trips and also because car remains attractive. This suggests that improving the bus network would enable mode shift but that measures to deter people from using their cars would also be required. Figure 6.2 shows the growth in bus passenger kilometres and displacement from Tube and National Rail.
Figure 6.2 Change in public transport passenger kilometres, 2041
Source: City Planning 2. Cycling mode share of 15 per cent
Why is this being tested? The impact of a very significant increase in cycle travel on public transport and the road network.
What is being tested? The impact of increasing the cycling mode share in 2041 to 15 per cent, compared to 6 per cent in the core reference case and 2 per cent today.
How has this been assessed? Exogenously increase cycling trips in the strategic modelling to represent a 15 per cent mode share in 2041. In contrast, the core reference case has a cycling mode share of 6 per cent. Assessment of the impact on public transport and car trips and resulting crowding and congestion relief.
How effective is it? Increasing the cycling mode share to 15 per cent by 2041 has a greater impact on car than public transport travel. The average number of car trips would fall by 1.2 million per day and traffic congestion would reduce by 13 per cent across London. If cycling was to reach 15 per cent mode share, much of the growth would be in orbital trips and travel in outer London. For public transport, this would mean a fall in shorter distance trips, particularly a shift from bus and Tube. Figure 6.3 shows the relative reduction in car and public transport trips as a result of cycling increases.
Figure 6.3: Change in 2041 trip numbers due to increased cycling mode share.
Source: City Planning 3. Opportunity Areas and town centres, sustainable growth
Why is this being tested?
Much of the growth planned for London is due to take place in town centres and Opportunity Areas and without change these areas will generate significant car growth. This test is to understand how congestion and traffic growth might be mitigated by a broad package of interventions.
What is being tested?
Promoting the development of self-sustaining town centres and Opportunity Areas by discouraging car ownership, reducing parking and increasing public transport connectivity.
How has the illustrative intervention been assessed?
Public transport generalised costs (overall perceived cost including travel time, crowding and fares) were reduced by 20 per cent, representing as yet unplanned network improvements. Residential properties were made ‘car free’ in Opportunity Areas and town centres. Free workplace parking was removed in town centres and Opportunity Areas.
How effective is it?
Discouraging car usage and increasing public transport connectivity produces a significant decrease in car use of 600,000 trips per day and an increase in public transport across all modes and some increase in walking and cycling. There is an associated decrease in congestion across London of 9 per cent with the greatest reduction in inner London. Low car ownership on its own could deliver a high sustainable mode share, but public provides the connectivity necessary to make attractive places to live and work. Figure 6.4 shows the change in car trips from 2015 to 2041 in both town centres and Opportunity Areas.
Figure 6.4 Change in car trips in town centres and opportunity areas, 2015 to 2041.
Source: City Planning 4. Changing the way road use is paid for
Why is this being tested? To explore the benefits that changing the way road use is paid for might achieve in terms of mode shift, traffic reductions, congestion relief and environmental benefits. What would the impact be on public transport, walking and cycling?
What is being tested? Changing the way road use is paid for; building on the ULEZ and Central London Congestion Charge, a distance-based road charge was tested with different values for inner and outer London.
How has the illustrative intervention been assessed? A distance-based, per kilometre charge was applied on every highway link in inner London and outer London. Higher charges were applied in inner London.
How effective is it? The test generates mode shift away from the car with a reduction of 350,000 car trips per day which shift equally to walking/cycling and public transport. The major change in public transport trips is in bus passenger kilometres which increase by 6 per cent, indicating the extent to which bus offers an alternative to car in inner and outer London. There are significant reductions in car kilometres and congestion across inner and outer London, with 5,000,000 fewer car kilometres on the roads overall and a 15 per cent reduction in congestion across inner and outer London. There are also vehicle kilometre reductions and congestion benefits in Central London even though the test did not increase charge levels within the Congestion Charging Zone. Figure 6.5 shows the percentage change in trips by mode and the percentage change in vehicle delay in minutes per kilometre (min/km).
Figure 6.5: Change in 12 hour trips and vehicle delay, due to changing the way road use is paid for, 2041 from core reference case.
Source: City Planning 5. Focused population growth
Why is this being tested? To understand to what extent integrating housing land use and public transport connectivity could deliver mode shift to sustainable modes, achieve traffic reductions and reduce congestion.
What is being tested? Population growth from 2021 focused in areas of high public transport connectivity.
How has this been assessed? Focus all GLA population growth from 2021-2041 only in areas that:
- have public transport access levels (PTAL) of 4 and above;
- are within 1 kilometre of a town centre or rail station; or
- have access to greater than 600,000 jobs within 45 minutes.
The distribution of growth has been weighted according to the core reference case growth and connectivity levels are based on the funded investment programme. The rate of car ownership in each area remains unchanged.
How effective is it? Shifting population growth into more connected locations results in a 1 per cent reduction in car ownership. Overall, focusing population growth in areas with good public transport connectivity reduces car trips by 74,000 trips per day. Figure 6.6 shows small increases in congestion in Central and inner London of 1 per cent due to an increase in population growth in these areas, and decreases in outer London car kilometres and congestion of 1 to 2 per cent. There is also a small net reduction in public transport passenger kilometres as the land use change results in shorter commuting and travel distances. Overall the impacts on transport outcomes are positive, but the changes are relatively small as a high proportion of development is already planned in well-connected areas in the core reference case.
Figure 6.6 Change in 2041 vehicle delay due to focused population growth.
Source: City Planning Illustrative interventions summary
Table 6.7 provides a summary of the outcomes of each of the ten illustrative intervention scenarios set out above.
Table 6.7 Summary of lessons from the illustrative interventions.
| Scenario | Outcome | |--------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 1. Bus connectivity package in inner and outer London | Improving bus connectivity and quality has the potential to attract people to buses and significantly increase bus use, but would need to be combined with measures to deter car travel to deliver significant mode shift. | | 2. 15 per cent cycling mode share | Increasing the cycling mode share results in significant mode shift from the car and reduces vehicle congestion across London. If a high cycling mode share can be achieved, it would reduce pressure on the public transport system and improve the efficient use of road space across London. | | 3. Opportunity Areas and town centres – sustainable growth | Constraining car ownership and parking in opportunity areas and town centres reduces car use and congestion. Improving public transport connectivity alongside restricting car use is necessary to provide access to jobs and make places attractive to live. | | 4. Changing the way road use is paid for | Changing the way road use is paid for could significantly reduce vehicle kilometres and congestion, and deliver mode shift away from car. | | 5. Focused population growth | Focusing population growth in areas with good public transport connectivity reduces car trips, but much of the growth is already expected to take place in better connected areas. |
Source: City Planning 7. MTS package modelling
Introduction
This chapter details the package modelling exercise undertaken as part of the development and assessment of the draft MTS proposals. It first describes the purpose of the package modelling and then lists the contents of each package. It then describes the outcomes of the modelling against the eight key quantified measures outlined in Chapter 2, and concludes with a summary of the assessment.
MTS package modelling - summary
- The draft MTS responds to the challenges and opportunities identified as part of the evidence base, aiming to deliver the Mayor’s vision and adopt a Healthy Streets Approach.
- Six strategic modelling packages (A to F) have been defined which build on knowledge gained from scheme and illustrative intervention modelling described in Chapters 5 and 6.
- These packages have been assessed through strategic modelling to determine what schemes and policies would be required to meet the full vision set out by the Mayor.
- Package A is the core reference case. Packages B to F contain proposals beyond the funded programme. Each builds on the assumptions included in its predecessor.
- The packages also form the basis of options considered within the Integrated Impact Assessment for the draft MTS.
- Overall the strategic modelling demonstrates that achieving 80 per cent of trips by walking, cycling and public transport is feasible with the application of the policies and proposals contained in the draft MTS and modelled in packages A to F.
Introduction to MTS packages
The draft MTS responds to the challenges and opportunities identified as part of the evidence base and sets out the Mayor’s for London. Chapters 5 and 6 of this report describe a series of schemes and policies which could contribute to achieving the Mayor’s vision.
The MTS packages shown in Figure 2.2 are a series of model scenarios that have been developed to consider how these prospective schemes and policies could collectively contribute to meeting the challenges set out in the evidence base and, ultimately, what schemes and policies would be required to meet the vision set out by the Mayor. The packages also form the basis of options considered within the Integrated Impact Assessment for the draft MTS. The package model tests build on knowledge gained from all previous work, including analysis of the core reference case and illustrative intervention model tests described in previous sections. The 2041 Reference Case is considered to be ‘Package A’ in this sequence. Description of the packages
A summary description is provided for each package. Each successive package builds on the assumptions included in its predecessor. A full scheme list is provided in Appendix 1. Package A is the core reference case described in Chapter 3.
Package B: Optimising the network
One of the main challenges identified in the core reference case is continued traffic dominance with highway congestion affecting bus speeds. Package B aims to enhance the existing network through bus priority schemes the reallocation of road space in areas of high place value identified by the Street Types for London. It also includes frequency improvements to some rail services. A summary of key schemes is provided below:
- Bus priority schemes, enabling faster journey times in Central London; low emission bus zones; and high frequency links;
- 30 trains per hour on the Elizabeth Line;
- Some selected National Rail and London Overground improvements;
- Tram frequency uplifts; and
- 10 to 30 per cent reduction in highway capacity on the highway links with the highest value (‘place’) as identified in Street Types for London.
Package C: Incremental expansion
Crowding on the Tube, Elizabeth Line, DLR, London Overground, Trams and National Rail is a key challenge in the core reference case because funded improvements do not go beyond the mid-2020s and demand for travel will increase. Building upon the improvement schemes included in package B, package C aims to reduce crowding, encourage further mode shift from the car and increase public transport demand. London can also maximise the benefits of National Rail in south London by creating a London Suburban Metro. These schemes represent improvements that require line or track upgrades and new rolling stock but not new rail lines. A summary of key schemes is provided below:
- Deep Tube upgrade & World Class Capacity programmes including upgrades to the Bakerloo, Central, Waterloo & City, Piccadilly, Jubilee and Northern Lines;
- Creating a London Suburban Metro;
- Further National Rail investment including upgrades to West Anglia mainline, Brighton mainline, Chiltern Line and new stations;
- 30 trains per hour on the DLR;
- London Overground frequency increases; and
- Construction of the Silvertown Tunnel and associated bus improvements.
______________________________________________________________________
6 https://tfl.gov.uk/info-for/boroughs/street-types Package D: New connections
New public transport connections are needed to unlock growth in jobs and homes, provide an improved public transport service and reduce crowding. These schemes also support further agglomeration benefits in London’s economy. A summary of key schemes is provided below:
- Crossrail 2, linking Surrey and Hertfordshire with two new 37 kilometre tunnels from Wimbledon to Tottenham Hale and New Southgate;
- Bakerloo Line Extension to Lewisham and beyond;
- Elizabeth Line extension to Slade Green;
- DLR extensions from Gallions Reach;
- London Overground extensions and strategic interchange investment including to Barking Riverside and Abbey Wood, and to Hounslow;
- Tram extension from South Wimbledon to Sutton; and
- Further bus network development.
Package E: Traffic reduction
Package E contains a range of measures to reduce traffic and achieve Healthy Streets for London. A summary of key schemes is provided below:
- Further road space reallocation to walking, cycling and bus priority in order to reduce traffic dominance and deliver Healthy Streets for London.
- Further increases in parking charges, limits on free commuter parking or a work place parking levy;
- Measures to accelerate the rate of car ownership reduction resulting in a quarter of a million fewer cars owned in London; and
- Measures to limit the growth of freight traffic, so that HGV traffic does not rise and van traffic grows only in line with population.
Package F: Longer term changes to the way road use is paid for
Changes to the way road use is paid for in the longer term could help achieve an 80 per cent mode share for walking, cycling and public transport. A summary of the illustrative measures included is provided below:
- An indicative distance-based charge. The inner London distance-based charge assessed was twice the outer London charge per kilometre; and
- Measures to encourage green technology uptake.
Outcomes from the MTS packages
The outcomes of the incremental MTS packages from the 2015 base and the 2041 core reference case (Package A) through to Package F are compared below. The comparison uses a series of waterfall diagrams for each of the key quantified measures for assessment as set out in Chapter 2. The diagrams show the relative contribution of each package towards achieving the Mayor’s vision. Travel demand and mode share
With the measures included in the core reference case and the continuation of current trends, the sustainable mode share is forecast to increase from 64 per cent in 2015 to 70 per cent in 2041. The Healthy Streets Approach and public transport measures included in packages B to D increase the sustainable mode share to 72 per cent. With packages E to F containing traffic reduction measures and changes to the way road use is paid for in the longer term, the sustainable mode share increases to 80 per cent by 2041. Figure 7.1 shows the outcome mode shares for packages A, B to D, and E to F.
Figure 7.1 Mode share, 2015 and 2041 for packages A, B to D, and E to F.
Source: City Planning Traffic volumes and road congestion
In Central London, the funded schemes in package A with the additional network-optimising schemes proposed in package B contribute to moderate decreases in traffic volumes. Beyond this, the traffic reduction measures included in package E bring the greatest reduction in vehicle kilometres for general traffic. Figure 7.2 shows the forecast change in morning peak Central London vehicle kilometres in each package.
**Figure 7.2** Change in Central London morning peak vehicle kilometres, 2015 to 2041 for packages A to F, 2015 to 2041.
In outer London and across the GLA, road traffic volumes are expected to grow moderately from 2015 to 2041 in the core reference case (package A). The proposed large scale investment in public transport infrastructure (packages B to D) mitigates that somewhat, but the traffic reduction measures in packages E and F are required to significantly reduce road traffic, reducing road traffic by 13 per cent from 2015 levels. Figure 7.3 shows the forecast change in morning peak London wide vehicle kilometres brought about by each package.
Source: City Planning Highway capacity for general traffic is lower in the core reference case (package A) as a result of a range of changes related to the implementation of the Healthy Streets Approach. This capacity reduction results in lower average vehicle speeds. Packages B to F propose further reductions in capacity for general traffic to enable Healthy Streets and associated traffic reductions mean that speeds increase in inner and outer London, but fall in Central London. Figure 7.4 shows the projections for vehicle speed in Central London under each package and Figure 7.5 shows the projections for vehicle speed in London under each package. Figure 7.4 Change in Central London morning peak vehicle speed, 2015 to 2041 for packages A to F.
Source: City Planning
Figure 7.5 Change in London morning peak hour vehicle speed, 2015 to 2041 for packages A to F.
Source: City Planning Bus speeds
In the core reference case (package A), bus speeds are projected to fall due to the detrimental impact of congestion from general traffic. The implementation of a bus priority network plan in package B, could significantly improve bus speeds across London. The impact of traffic reduction measures (package E and F) further reduce congestion and improve bus speeds across the GLA and could result in increased bus speeds relative to 2015. The change in bus speeds from 2015 to package F (2041) is shown in Figure 7.6.
Figure 7.6 12 hour London bus speeds (kilometres per hour), 2015 and 2041 for packages A to F.
Source: City Planning Public transport usage and crowding
Strong growth in demand for public transport, particularly for rail based modes, is expected between 2015 and 2041 in the core reference case (package A).
Further public transport investment and traffic reduction measures significantly increase public transport patronage. Large scale infrastructure investment (packages B to D) could increase public transport passenger use by 18 per cent, and traffic reduction measures (packages E and F) by a further 17 per cent. Figure 7.7 shows change in overall public transport use under each package.
Figure 7.7 Change in 12 hour public transport passenger kilometres, 2015 to 2041 for packages A to F.
Demand for public transport is projected to increase at a faster rate than funded supply from 2021 in the core reference case (package A) and therefore crowding is expected to worsen without further investment. Further investment in public transport capacity is required to meet the needs of London’s growing population and changing travel behaviour.
The large scale public transport infrastructure investment included in packages B to D has the effect of reducing the proportion of passenger kilometres travelled in severely crowded conditions from 40 per cent in the reference case to 16 per cent. The traffic reduction measures included in packages E and F deliver mode shift from the car to public transport and active modes. This has the effect of increasing crowding somewhat compared to packages B to D, but crowding remains at nearly half the level seen in the reference case. Figure 7.8 shows the proportion of passenger kilometres in severely crowded conditions for each of the packages. Figure 7.8 Change in proportion of passenger kilometres on links with greater than 4 passengers standing per square metre in the morning peak, 2015 to 2041 for packages A, B to D, E and F
Source: City Planning Emissions
Figure 7.9 shows the variation between road vehicle emissions in each MTS package. With assumptions on vehicle technology kept constant, changes in emissions are dependent on the overall level of vehicle kilometres produced in each package. Packages B to D have little impact on emissions and the traffic reduction measures included in packages E and F are required to reduce vehicle kilometres and therefore to reduce emissions beyond the core reference case. Figure 7.9 only shows the impact of vehicle kilometre changes without further action on vehicle technology. The MTS Scenario in Chapter 8 includes the impact of intended changes to the vehicle fleet proposed in the draft MTS.
Figure 7.10 CO₂, PM₂.₅, PM₁₀ and NOₓ emissions from road based transport, 2041 for packages A to F.
Source: City Planning Conclusions
In summary, the packages deliver:
**Package A: Core reference case.** Without further investment beyond the current programme, London would experience traffic dominance, congestion, crowding and poor bus performance by 2041.
**Package B: Optimising the network.** Bus priority and some limited rail based frequency improvements to the existing network could improve travel experience and particularly bus services, but would not meaningfully deal with traffic dominance or crowding.
**Package C: Incremental expansion.** Upgrades of the remaining Tube lines and other rail services including a London Suburban Metro are needed to tackle crowding on the Tube and maximise the potential for rail in South London.
**Package D: New connections.** New rail connections will unlock development and enable London to accommodate greater growth. New lines such as Crossrail 2 and the Bakerloo Line extension will reduce crowding on some of the most congested lines and stations.
**Package E: Traffic reduction.** Traffic reduction measures could free up the space for achieving Healthy Streets for Londoners, reducing traffic and emissions.
**Package F: Longer term changes to the way road use is paid for.** In the longer term, changing the way road use is paid for could deliver an 80 per cent walking, cycling and public transport mode share for London.
**Delivery of 80 per cent mode share for walking, cycling and public transport**
In the development of the draft MTS, mode share has been a particular focus. In 2015 the mode share for walking, cycling and public transport was 64 per cent, 10.4 percentage points lower than when TfL was formed in 2000.
The Mayor vision is to achieve an 80 per cent sustainable mode share by 2041. The overall conclusion of the MTS package modelling is that delivering a further 16 per cent mode shift from 2015 to 2041 and achieving 80 per cent of trips by walking, cycling and public transport is feasible with the application of the policies and proposals in packages A to F. 8. The MTS scenario
Introduction
This chapter describes the preferred MTS scenario. Firstly, it outlines the contents of the MTS scenario and is then structured as a description of the outcomes of the modelling against each of the eight key quantified measures outlined in Chapter 2. Results are provided 2041 and for interim years.
MTS scenario outcomes - summary
- TfL has assessed a scenario which assumes delivery of the policies and proposals set out in the draft MTS in full through to 2041. This includes all measures tested as part of packages A to F.
- Under such assumptions, London could accommodate 5 million more trips every day by increasing the mode share for walking, cycling and public transport to 80 per cent.
- With the draft MTS, by 2041, travel will have risen by around a quarter but car travel will have fallen by around a third. There would be at least 3 million fewer car trips per day (compared to 2015) and 250,000 fewer cars owned in London. General traffic would reduce by 10 and 15 per cent, a reduction of 6 million kilometres.
- By 2041, between 3 and 5 million more trips could be made by active modes every day than in 2015 and total travel will increase by around 60 per cent on London's buses. Bus journeys will be quick and reliable with a 10 to 15 per cent improvement in speeds and particular improvements expected in Central and inner London.
- Traffic reduction and improvements in vehicle technology will deliver large scale reductions of 94 per cent in NOx and 47 per cent in PM2.5 emissions with road and rail transport on a clear trajectory to reach ‘zero carbon’ status by 2050.
- Total capacity on rail services - Tube, Elizabeth Line, DLR, London Overground, Trams and National Rail - will increase by around 90 per cent, with more than 80 million additional seat kilometres between 7am and 7pm each day.
- Total travel will increase by nearly 100 per cent on the Tube and rail.
- Despite rising passenger numbers, rail and Tube journeys will be less crowded. By 2041, crowding on rail and underground services will reduce by around 10 to 20 per cent compared to today, measured in terms of the total crowded distance compared to the total distance travelled.
- In total, 7.6m people will live within 45 minutes travel time of Central London, 2.3m more than today. The number of jobs accessible to the average Londoner within 45 minutes by public transport will increase by 70 per cent. Fewer London residents will be dependent on a car to access opportunities and services. Nearly 1.8m more people will be living in places with the best transport connections, defined as areas with a public transport accessibility rating of four or above. Description of the MTS scenario
The MTS scenario begins with the contents of the core reference case set out in Chapter 3 and then includes policies and proposals outlined within the draft MTS. A scheme list is provided as Appendix 1. A summary of key schemes beyond the current funded programme is provided below:
- Rail: deliver Crossrail 2, a London Suburban Metro, Elizabeth Line extension east of Abbey Wood and other upgrades to the national rail network.
- Tube: deliver World-Class Capacity programme, Deep Tube programme, Bakerloo Line extension to Lewisham (and beyond), station capacity programme and step free Tube stations.
- DLR: deliver the DLR upgrades and potential DLR extensions from Gallions Reach.
- Trams: deliver Tram upgrades and potential Tram extension to Sutton.
- London Overground: deliver network-wide frequency upgrades, strategic interchanges, Barking Riverside extension and potentially other London Overground extensions
- Buses: develop the bus network to meet existing and future demand and deliver the bus priority network and Low Emission Bus Zones.
- Streets: implement the Healthy Streets Approach to deliver improved streets and priority for walking and cycling, and deliver Silvertown Tunnel and associated bus improvements including at least 20 buses per hour in the first year.
- Environment: deliver the Ultra Low Emission Zone and policies on vehicle emissions set out in chapter 3 of the MTS.
- Traffic reduction: indicative measures including changes to residential and workplace parking, changes to the way road use is paid for and freight demand measures as required to deliver the Mayor’s vision for travel in London.
Figure 8.1 shows the overall impact of the rail schemes on capacity. They would deliver an almost 90 per cent increase in capacity to Central London in the morning peak.
The MTS package modelling has demonstrated that traffic reduction measures are likely to be necessary, in the longer term, to achieve the Mayor’s vision of an 80 per cent mode share for walking, cycling and public transport in 2041. However, the approach to achieving this is illustrative of the required impact and should not be taken as an indication of specific proposals or scheme designs. The trajectory of the implementation reflects shorter term measures in the draft MTS such as air quality improvement and car reduction strategies and the desire to be more ambitious in reducing car ownership within new developments. Other traffic reduction measures and changes to the way road use is paid for are considered in the longer term. Table 8.2 provides a summary of measures tested. Figure 8.1 Morning peak rail and Underground capacity improvements to Central London, 2015 to 2041 in the MTS scenario
Table 8.2 Summary traffic reduction measures included in the MTS scenario
| Policy type | Description | |------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------| | Parking supply and charging | Further increases in parking charges, limits on free commuter parking or a work place parking levy | | Car ownership and residential parking | Measures to accelerate the rate of car ownership reduction resulting in a quarter of a million fewer cars owned in London | | Changes to the way road use is paid for | This has been assessed with an indicative distance-based road user charge in the longer term | | Freight demand management | Measures to limit the growth of freight traffic, so that HGV traffic does not rise and van traffic grows only in line with population |
Source: City Planning Summary of outcomes in the MTS scenario
Travel demand and mode share. The delivery of the MTS would enable travel in London to increase, in line with expectations from population and economic growth, by at least 5 million trips per day to 32 million in 2041 in a sustainable way. Within this increase, car percentage mode share is forecast to fall to from 36 per cent of all trips in 2015 to 32 per cent in 2021. There would be further reductions to 25 per cent in 2031, and finally 20 per cent in 2041. This is summarised in Figure 8.3.
Figure 8.3 Mode share, 2015 to 2041 in the MTS Scenario.
Figure 8.4 shows the outcome mode shares by region of London. For each movement with a trip end in Central London, public transport mode shares are at least 90 per cent with 75 per cent achieved for travel within outer London. Car/taxi could still make up 70 per cent of trips between outer London and the rest of the UK. Figure 8.4 Daily trip volumes and distribution by mode, 2015 to 2041 in the MTS Scenario
Source: City Planning Traffic and congestion
The measures proposed by the draft MTS deliver significant decreases in traffic in the morning peak, as shown in Figure 8.5. The greatest change is in inner London - a 26 per cent reduction. London-wide, the reduction in traffic in the morning peak is 13 per cent.
Figure 8.5 Percentage change in morning peak vehicle kilometres, 2015 to 2041 in the MTS Scenario.
Source: City Planning
Fewer cars and shorter journeys mean that speeds increase across most of London, as shown in Figure 8.6. In Central London, very high levels of road space reallocation to sustainable modes means that speeds for general traffic slow, in inner London speeds remain around the same as now, and in outer London, average speeds rise from 28 to 30 kilometres per hour in the morning peak, as shown in Figure 8.6. In conclusion, reallocating road space to meet Healthy Streets objectives could be achieved while reducing delay at a London wide level. Figure 8.6 Change in London wide morning peak vehicle speed, 2015 to 2041 in the MTS Scenario.
Source: City Planning Public transport use
The change in 12 hour passenger kilometres by rail, bus and Tube from 2015 to 2041 with the Mayor’s Transport Strategy is shown in Figure 8.7. There is a near doubling of passenger kilometres from 2015 to 2041 with the draft Mayor’s Transport Strategy as both infrastructure improvements and traffic reduction measures encourage more people to use public transport. The greatest increase is in rail from just over 30 billion passenger kilometres each year in 2015 to nearly 70 billion passenger kilometres in 2041. This is due to the introduction of the Elizabeth Line, Crossrail 2 and the London Suburban Metro. Tube passenger kilometres increase significantly in 2031 due to the introduction of the deep Tube upgrades and the Bakerloo Line extension. Note that these forecasts assume higher mode shift from car to public transport than to active modes; in reality, the implementation of the Healthy Streets Approach may lead to a greater shift to active modes than forecast, reducing public transport passenger kilometres somewhat and also bringing crowding benefits.
Figure 8.7 Change in annual passenger kilometres (millions), 2015 to 2041 in the MTS Scenario.
Source: City Planning
Bus speeds
The change in bus speeds from 2015 to 2041 is shown in Figure 8.8. Buses benefit from stable or improved speeds for general traffic as well as the reallocation of road space to buses so that bus speeds improve London-wide from 2021 to 2041. Despite slowing speeds for general traffic, bus speeds improve in Central London due to the reallocation of road space to buses. Consequently, bus speeds are forecast to improve in every region of London. London, bus speeds increase from 14.4 kilometres per hour in 2015 levels to 15.8 kilometres per hour in 2041. Crowding on rail and Underground
Crowding on rail services drops significantly as a result of the draft MTS, with the proportion of public transport passenger kilometres travelled on crowded links in the morning peak reducing from 35 per cent of the total in 2015 to 22 per cent in 2041. Crowded links are defined as those with more than 4 passengers standing per square metre in the morning peak. This means that, for an average journey, passengers will experience less crowding, as shown in Table 8.9. Again, if more trips were made by active modes than in the core forecast, and fewer by public transport, crowding would be reduced even further.
Table 8.9 Proportion of passenger kilometres on links with more than 4 passengers standing per square metre in the morning peak,
| Mode | 2015 | 2041 MTS Scenario | |-------------------------------------------|------|-------------------| | All rail and Underground | 35% | 22% | | National Rail, London Overground, Elizabeth Line | 32% | 19% | | Tube & DLR | 40% | 27% |
Source: City Planning
Figure 8.10 shows forecast crowding on National Rail, Tube, DLR, London Overground and Trams in the morning peak in 2041 with the MTS scenario. Figure 8.10 Morning peak crowding on rail and Underground services in London, 2041 with the MTS scenario Emissions
Figure 8.11 shows the 2021, 2031 and 2041 road vehicle emissions of the full MTS scenario against the 2013 baseline. Under this scenario, the whole bus fleet becomes electric or hydrogen powered by 2037, and the uptake of ultra-low emission vehicles across all vehicle types is in line with the trajectory required for all road transport to become fully zero emission by 2050.
This could deliver:
- A 72 per cent reduction in CO₂ emissions from transport (excluding aviation, 2013 base) in London by 2041, with road and rail transport on a clear trajectory to reach zero carbon by 2050.
- A 94 per cent reduction in road transport NOₓ emissions, and compliance with legal limit values for NO₂ levels on London’s streets.
- A 47 per cent reduction in road transport PM₂.₅ and 36 per cent reduction in road transport PM₁₀ emissions.
Figure 8.11 Road vehicle emissions including vehicle emissions policy measures, 2013 to 2040.
Source: City Planning Connectivity
New and enhanced public transport connections and improvements to bus speeds will mean that London residents will be better connected to jobs, services and to one another.
Figure 8.12 shows the change in access to jobs within 45 minutes brought about by improvements to public transport services identified in the draft MTS.
In total, 7.6m people will live within 45min travel time of Central London, 2.3m more than today. The number of jobs accessible to the average Londoner within 45 minutes by public transport will increase by 70 per cent. The assessment only considers travel time changes rather than the impact of new jobs and assumes that all identified schemes are in place by 2041. In addition to the Elizabeth line, this package includes schemes such as Crossrail 2 and the Bakerloo line extension. All areas in Central London will see an increase of at least 0.25 million jobs reachable in 45 minutes. In Inner London many areas will experience an increase of over 1 million extra jobs reachable within 45 minutes.
Fewer London residents will be dependent on a car to access opportunities and services. Nearly 1.8m more people will be living in places with the best transport connections, defined as areas with a public transport accessibility rating of four or above.
Figure 8.12 Change in number of jobs reachable within 45 mins travel time by public transport, 2015 to 2041 in the MTS scenario.
## Appendix 1: Scheme List
| MTS Scenario Scheme | Package\* | |-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------| | Elizabeth line | Core Ref Case (A) | | TFL Business Plan Tube service improvements to Victoria, Northern and Jubilee Lines | Core Ref Case (A) | | Four-Line Modernisation programme – Metropolitan, District, Hammersmith & City and Circle | Core Ref Case (A) | | Northern Line extension | Core Ref Case (A) | | TFL Business Plan DLR capacity and service improvements including New Train for Docklands | Core Ref Case (A) | | TFL Business Plan London Overground capacity and service improvements including Gospel Oak to Barking Line electrification, new trains and increased frequency on North London Line | Core Ref Case (A) | | TFL Business Plan Tram service improvements including Dingwall Loop and increased frequency to New Addington | Core Ref Case (A) | | TFL Business Plan Bus service improvements including changes to bus routes to improve reliability and reduce congestion and additional services to support residential growth | Core Ref Case (A) | | HS2 phase 1 and associated National Rail changes, including mitigation of impacts at street level | Core Ref Case (A) | | Thameslink Programme | Core Ref Case (A) | | HLOS programme | Core Ref Case (A) | | Stratford–Angel Road service | Core Ref Case (A) | | Croxley Link | Core Ref Case (A) | | Funded improvements to the cycle network | Core Ref Case (A) | | Road modernisation plan | Core Ref Case (A) | | ULEZ in Central London | Core Ref Case (A) | | Elizabeth Line 30 trains per hour | B | | Tram upgrades | B | | Bus priority network | B | | Low Emissions Bus Zones (including bus priority) | B | | Essex Thameside Increased frequency | B | | Watford DCs increased frequency | B | | Great Northern Frequency upgrade | B | | Healthy Streets Approach | B | | World-Class Capacity programme – Jubilee, Northern, Victoria | C | | Deep Tube programme – Piccadilly, Central, Bakerloo and Waterloo & City | C | | DLR upgrades | C | | London Overground frequency upgrades (network-wide) | C | | London Suburban Metro | C | | Brighton Mainline Upgrade (higher frequencies) | C | | West Anglia Main Line 4-tracking | C | | Increased rail capacity (other lines) | C | | Scheme | Package | |----------------------------------------------------------------------|---------| | Silvertown Tunnel and associated bus services | C | | Crossrail 2 | D | | Bakerloo Line extension to Lewisham and beyond | D | | Elizabeth Line extension east of Abbey Wood | D | | DLR extension from Gallions Reach to Thamesmead | D | | Barking Riverside London Overground Extension | D | | Strategic interchanges at Clapham Junction, Lewisham, Stratford and Old Oak Common | D | | Other London Overground extensions (including Hounslow–Cricklewood) | D | | Other new public transport river crossings in East London | D | | Tram extension to Sutton | D | | Develop bus network to meet existing and future demand | D | | HS2 phase 2 | D | | Reduce, re-time and re-mode deliveries and encourage more freight consolidation | E | | Healthy Streets Approach – further measures | E | | Traffic reduction measures | E | | ULEZ in inner London | F | | Longer term changes to the way road use is paid for | F |
*All schemes in packages A to F included in the MTS Scenario. Packages are cumulative from A to F.*
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4028-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 82,
"total-input-tokens": 144649,
"total-output-tokens": 29064,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
82,
1
],
[
82,
82,
2
],
[
82,
2894,
3
],
[
2894,
6138,
4
],
[
6138,
9233,
5
],
[
9233,
12341,
6
],
[
12341,
14351,
7
],
[
14351,
16269,
8
],
[
16269,
21066,
9
],
[
21066,
21752,
10
],
[
21752,
24661,
11
],
[
24661,
26723,
12
],
[
26723,
27357,
13
],
[
27357,
28068,
14
],
[
28068,
30574,
15
],
[
30574,
32057,
16
],
[
32057,
33132,
17
],
[
33132,
35689,
18
],
[
35689,
38457,
19
],
[
38457,
40433,
20
],
[
40433,
40792,
21
],
[
40792,
40901,
22
],
[
40901,
42139,
23
],
[
42139,
42263,
24
],
[
42263,
43958,
25
],
[
43958,
44218,
26
],
[
44218,
45206,
27
],
[
45206,
45309,
28
],
[
45309,
47021,
29
],
[
47021,
48208,
30
],
[
48208,
50889,
31
],
[
50889,
53731,
32
],
[
53731,
54487,
33
],
[
54487,
56567,
34
],
[
56567,
57426,
35
],
[
57426,
57992,
36
],
[
57992,
58321,
37
],
[
58321,
59604,
38
],
[
59604,
61988,
39
],
[
61988,
62829,
40
],
[
62829,
63438,
41
],
[
63438,
65122,
42
],
[
65122,
66332,
43
],
[
66332,
67166,
44
],
[
67166,
68573,
45
],
[
68573,
70115,
46
],
[
70115,
71597,
47
],
[
71597,
72865,
48
],
[
72865,
75601,
49
],
[
75601,
77967,
50
],
[
77967,
79727,
51
],
[
79727,
81089,
52
],
[
81089,
82800,
53
],
[
82800,
84587,
54
],
[
84587,
86371,
55
],
[
86371,
88708,
56
],
[
88708,
91240,
57
],
[
91240,
93623,
58
],
[
93623,
95976,
59
],
[
95976,
96698,
60
],
[
96698,
97833,
61
],
[
97833,
98469,
62
],
[
98469,
98711,
63
],
[
98711,
99361,
64
],
[
99361,
101045,
65
],
[
101045,
101257,
66
],
[
101257,
102079,
67
],
[
102079,
104111,
68
],
[
104111,
106805,
69
],
[
106805,
109436,
70
],
[
109436,
110510,
71
],
[
110510,
111430,
72
],
[
111430,
111543,
73
],
[
111543,
112501,
74
],
[
112501,
112620,
75
],
[
112620,
114400,
76
],
[
114400,
115721,
77
],
[
115721,
115826,
78
],
[
115826,
116789,
79
],
[
116789,
118218,
80
],
[
118218,
122192,
81
],
[
122192,
123902,
82
]
]
} |
c5fbddb62812d0187e1e3e2cf9bed94b7b03f18a | Mayor’s Transport Strategy: Supporting Evidence Challenges & Opportunities
June 2017 The Mayor’s Transport Strategy is the statutory document that sets out the Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan’s, policies and proposals to reshape transport in London over the next 25 years. It is an ambitious strategy that puts people’s health and quality of life at the very heart of planning the city’s transport. Along with the new London Plan and the Mayor’s other strategies for economic development, the environment, housing, health inequalities and culture, it provides the blueprint for making London a city that is not only home to more people, but is a better place for all of those people to live in.
TfL has collected evidence to identify the challenges and opportunities facing London’s transport network over the next 25 years. This has formed the basis of the strategy development process, and helps us understand why the priorities and policies outlined in the strategy are relevant and necessary for London. The analytical work presented here includes analysis of past trends, current conditions and modelling of possible futures. It looks at the challenges facing London from the perspective of those who live and work in the city, as well as in terms of the operation of the transport network itself.
The key conclusion is that for London to grow and thrive, it is essential that London’s residents, workers and visitors do more walking and cycling and use public transport more to improve their health and the environment, to make streets work more efficiently & keep London moving. This report presents evidence on how London has changed since 2000 and also describes the key challenges and opportunities facing London today and in future. The report presents analysis and forecasts of the expected future conditions in London without the implementation of the Mayor’s Transport Strategy. The report is structured as follows:
| Section | Page number | |---------------------------------------------------|-------------| | 1 How London has changed since 2000 | 4 | | 2 A growing city | 9 | | 3 The health challenge | 14 | | 4 Healthy Streets and healthy people | 17 | | 5 A healthy environment | 26 | | 6 A good public transport experience | 31 | | 7 New homes and jobs | 39 | | 8 Conclusion | 46 | How London has changed since 2000 London’s transport network has been transformed since 2000, delivering a better experience for customers.
Since TfL was formed in 2000 and the first Mayor of London was elected, London has experienced unprecedented population growth, supported by an expanding and improving transport network. All public transport modes have seen significant increases in capacity and service quality; with innovations on the street network such as congestion charging, cycle hire and superhighways, and technological innovation from Oyster to apps.
In 2015/16 the Underground carried a total of 1.35 billion journeys, 39% higher than 2000/01. Consistently more than 97% of scheduled services were operated in 2015/16 against 92% in 2000/01.
Buses carried 2.3 billion journeys in 2015/16, 71% higher than in 2000/01. Bus service reliability has improved by 46% over the period, although recently reliability and patronage have suffered in line with a rise in general traffic congestion.
National Rail (by London and South East operators) carried 1.2 billion journeys in 2015/16, 78% higher than in 2000/01, an average annual growth rate of 4%. General reliability has also improved.
The volume of road traffic in London in 2015 was 10% lower than in 2000. The reduction was particularly intense in central London, at 21%, but there were also significant falls in both inner and outer London since 2000 (17% and 6% respectively).
Over the same period, speeds fell by 8% although consistently between 87% and 90% of journeys on London’s major roads were completed within five minutes of the ‘expected’ time.
The number of cycle journeys has increased by 133% since 2000/01. The amount of walking has also grown considerably, reflecting the shift from car to public transport. Since 2000, there has been substantial mode shift away from the car, bucking national trends for many years. London has grown rapidly in recent years, leading to increased demand on the transport system. In 2015, London’s population stood at 8.7 million – higher than the previous record level of 8.6 million in 1939. An average of 26.7 million trips per day were made in London in 2015 – an 18% increase from 2000.
Alongside this growth in travel demand, London has achieved an unprecedented 10.4 percentage point shift in mode share away from the private car towards public transport, walking and cycling – reflecting sustained investment in these modes, limits on the capacity of the road network, and wider structural, social and behavioural factors. This shows that change is possible, but the recent rise in car traffic is an urgent reminder that much more needs to be done to deliver mode shift from the car.
Over this period, London has become one of the most sustainable major cities in terms of mode share. Motorisation, defined as cars per thousand inhabitants, fell in London from 334 in 1995 to 307 in 2012. Of the cities that participate in the UITP comparison study, London is now the least motorised developed city other than Hong Kong and Singapore. The car mode share is higher in outer London and during evenings and weekends.
The volume and share of car travel varies considerably by place and time, with the majority (58%) of car trips made by London residents taking place in outer London.
London residents are more likely to walk and use their cars at the weekend, and more likely to travel by public transport during the week.
**Purpose**
Mode shares differ depending on the purpose of the trip, with commute and education trips more likely to be on public transport and other work trips more likely to be driven.
**Time of day**
The car mode share is highest in the evening and overnight, and lowest in the daytime interpeak.
**Distance**
The car mode share is highest for middle distance trips (2-5km), with longer trips more likely to be made by public transport (PT). Mode shift from the car was driven by investment in the alternatives but also by factors beyond the transport system.
**Supply:** Improvements to public transport capacity and quality whilst keeping fares low increased demand. Highway capacity was eroded and the cost of motoring rose.
**Demand:** Generally, car travel rises with income; and the majority of car travel is in outer London, where incomes haven’t increased since 2003.
**Structure:** The population has also changed.
Young people are much less likely to hold a driving licence than in the past. In-migration rose, with migrants being less likely to drive.
In future, travel patterns will be influenced by what we do, but also by factors outside our control. There is emerging evidence that car traffic is increasing, suggesting the balance of factors influencing demand may be changing.
______________________________________________________________________
**Note:** GVA stands for Gross Value Added and is a measure of economic growth. A growing city London is growing rapidly, with the population expected to reach 10.5m by 2041. This is 28% higher than in 2011 and is equivalent to adding the combined populations of Birmingham and Glasgow during this time.
The composition of London’s population is also expected to change, altering the emphasis of future demand pressures on the transport networks. In particular, there will be an increase in the numbers of older people – particularly focused in outer London – leading to increased demand for accessible services.
East London will experience the most growth, with much of the growth taking place within Opportunity and Growth Areas.
| Popn | 2011 | 2041 | Change | |-------|------|------|--------| | Inner | 3.2m | 4.3m | 31% | | Outer | 5.0m | 6.2m | 25% | | GLA | 8.2m | 10.5m| 28% |
The recent ‘baby boom’ will stabilise, giving net natural change of +80,000 per year.
By 2041, the number of Londoners over 70 will have grown by 85%.
More people will leave London than arrive, with net out-migration of 20,000 per year. Employment is expected to grow by more than a million additional jobs by 2041, concentrated in the Central Activities Zone.
London’s employment has grown from 4.6 million jobs in 2000 to 5.7 million in March 2016 and is projected to grow to 6.25 million by 2031 and 6.75 million by 2041.
Agglomeration will see employment growth concentrated in the central area. 1.4 million jobs are expected in the City of London and Westminster alone.
Tower Hamlets – containing Canary Wharf and the Isle of Dogs – will contain 450,000 jobs. Stratford and Old Oak also have the potential to become major hubs.
The Opportunity Areas will also play a key role in supporting London’s growth, with the potential capacity to support nearly 600,000 jobs.
Over the past 15 years manufacturing has been declining and jobs in professional services have been increasing – this is expected to continue. The switch from lower to higher density employment is expected to lead to an increase in commuting by public transport and a fall in commuting by car.
Nevertheless, a third of jobs are in outer London, with a 56% car mode share for commuting. As London grows, we need to ensure more sustainable commuter patterns for travel beyond the centre. The Reference Case assesses what could happen based on growth forecasts, trends and the funded programme.
The MTS relies upon an understanding of what could happen in the future without the measures proposed in the draft strategy. A Reference Case has been produced to build on our understanding of current travel and present possible future travel volumes, distribution and mode share. This has formed the basis of analysis identifying the challenges and opportunities facing London and its transport network over the period to 2041.
The Reference Case is based upon:
1. GLA population and employment projections
2. The funded programme of investment from TfL and other transport providers
3. Wider assumptions about policies relating to aspects such as fares, fuel costs and car parking, including an assumption that ongoing investment will facilitate continued growth in cycle travel.
### Population and employment growth forecasts
| | Population | Employment | |----------------|------------|------------| | | 2015 (m) | 2041 (m) | | Central London | 0.2 | 0.3 | | Inner London | 3.2 | 3.9 | | Outer London | 5.2 | 6.2 | | Greater London | 8.7 | 10.5 |
### Population and employment growth 2015 to 2041
- **Central**: 21% Population growth, 27% Employment growth
- **Inner**: 19% Population growth, 22% Employment growth
- **Outer**: 22% Population growth, 22% Employment growth
- **Total**: 50% Population growth, 22% Employment growth
### The funded programme includes the following major schemes:
- The opening of the Elizabeth line from 2019
- Northern line extension to Battersea and Nine Elms and upgrades of the Jubilee, Victoria, Northern and sub-surface lines
- Capacity and frequency enhancements, and electrification of the Gospel Oak to Barking line
- Capacity and frequency enhancements
- Delivery of the HLOS and Thameslink upgrade schemes
### Key assumptions determining future travel patterns:
- The economy is expected to grow, so that values of time increase.
- The number of cars owned per person is expected to fall, but the population increase is so high that the total number of cars rises.
- Highway capacity for general traffic is expected to reduce in the early years due to measures to promote cycling amongst other things.
- The cost of car use is expected to fall over time, as technology improves vehicle efficiency, but parking costs are expected to increase. By 2041, there will be 5 million more trips per day, an increase of 23% compared to today.
Travel demand is expected to increase to around 32 million trips on an average day in 2041, 5 million more than today.
Analysis based upon current trends and the funded programme (so, without the interventions proposed in the draft Mayor’s Transport Strategy) suggests that most of the additional travel demand will be more public transport, walking and cycling.
Despite a falling car mode share, car kilometres will rise by around 8%. This reflects the distribution of trips, with more car travel in outer London where trips are longer.
This, coupled with a large rise in van traffic of 26%, will lead to an overall rise in traffic on the network if left unchecked. The health challenge Most Londoners do not do enough activity to be healthy and travelling actively is the best way to achieve this.
The life expectancy of Londoners has been increasing but adults are living more of their lives in poor health.
Adults need at least 150 minutes and children 420 minutes of physical activity a week to stay healthy and reduce their risk of common, preventable diseases.
Building physical activity into your daily routine by walking or cycling is one of the best ways to stay active and healthy.
Currently, a third of Londoners achieve their recommended level of physical activity from active travel alone.
TfL and London’s boroughs have a legal duty to consider the impacts of our activities on health and health inequality. Transport has a number of direct and indirect impacts on the health of Londoners:
- Physical activity
- Air quality
- Road danger
- Noise
- Access to jobs and services and social inclusion
If everyone in London walked or cycled for 20 minutes each day £1.7bn in NHS treatment costs could be saved.
| Amount of time spent active per average journey (minutes) | Proportion of adults achieving 2x10 minute periods of walking or cycling per day, 2014/15 | |---------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------| | 22 | 17 | 8-15 | \<1 | 62% | 60% | 66% | 69% | 72% | 75% |
Travelling by public transport typically involves significantly more physical activity than travelling by car, due to the need to walk to/from the station or stop. Recent research shows that active & public transport commuters had a lower BMI than car commuters. Healthy Streets are safe, inclusive and encourage activity but London’s streets fall short of expectations.
Streets that are inclusive and enable people to be active improve health and can help reduce inequalities but also contribute to broader environmental sustainability and economic prosperity – if it works well for people it is likely to attract visitors and be more successful in terms of footfall, shops and services.
Comparison of experience and expectation scores for each indicator.
London’s streets perform below expectations across all measures. Healthy Streets and healthy people Walking is an active and enjoyable way to travel and more people could walk rather than drive.
Nearly everyone walks. How much people walk is largely determined by how close they are to a range of destinations and whether they own a car.
Inner Londoners walk more than outer Londoners, women walk more than men, and adults aged 17-44 walk the most whilst older people walk the least.
The proportion of trips made on foot has stayed the same for a long time – so change is difficult. But Londoners need to walk more to be active enough for good health.
Improving the appeal of walking, by providing a safer and more pleasant environment, can encourage people to walk. But whilst the car remains a cheap and convenient option, people will continue to drive walkable journeys.
A higher proportion of short trips are walked in central than inner & outer London – so outer London offers the best opportunity for change.
Many trips that could be walked take place in locations that already appear to be ‘walkable’.
Walkability is a technical measure that takes into account the availability of the network and the density of origins and destination. Cycling is an efficient and healthy way to get about and there is considerable potential for growth in cycle travel.
Cycle travel grew by 133% London-wide and 221% in central London between 2000 - 2015. There is considerable opportunity to deliver growth in cycle travel, with more than nine million journeys currently made by a motorised mode every day that could be cycled instead.
77% of Londoners believe that cycling is enjoyable and people continue to cycle in London because it is fun, quick, convenient, cheap and a good way to keep fit.
People that don’t currently cycle in London can be concerned about safety and worried that cycling may not be a convenient option for them – to help them start cycling means overcoming the following barriers:
- Fear and vulnerability
- Lack of infrastructure
- Whether they identify with cycling and how attractive it is to them
- The physical effort of cycling
- Access to a bike
- How cycling compares to the alternatives
- Lack of confidence
More high quality, safe and pleasant routes, supported by plentiful and secure parking, will encourage new people to start cycling and existing cyclists to cycle more.
| Mode of transport | Number of cyclable stages | Mode of cyclable stage | Main mode of trip | Number of cyclable stages | |-------------------|---------------------------|------------------------|-------------------|---------------------------| | Car | 4.7m | | | | | Bus | 2.3m | | | | | Tube | 0.7m | | | | | Rail | 0.2m | | | | | Taxi | 0.1m | | | | | P2W | \<0.1m | | | |
Over 8 million trips could feasibly be cycled but aren’t now
Over 1 million stages as part of a longer trip could feasibly be cycled but aren’t now The number of people killed or seriously injured on London’s streets is the lowest on record but is nearly 2,100 per year.
In 2015, 2,092 people were killed or seriously injured (KSIs) on London’s streets, 42% below the 2005-09 baseline. The previous target was met six years early and London is on-track to achieve the target established in 2015 of a 50% reduction in KSIs by 2020.
Current forecasts show that if progress continued at a similar rate, KSIs would continue to fall to around 1,000 by 2040.
Vision Zero for London means our long term vision is to reduce road danger so that no deaths or serious injuries occur on London’s streets.
Buses and coaches are disproportionately involved in collisions with pedestrians and cyclists and in the last three years there were on average 200 people killed or seriously injured in collisions involving buses or coaches.
- Pedestrians, cyclists and motorcyclists are most at risk of being involved in a collision.
- Londoners from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic groups suffer a disproportionately high number of road casualties.
- Pedestrians in the most deprived areas are more than twice as likely to be injured as those in the least deprived areas.
- Between 2005/09 and 2015, child pedestrian KSI reduced by 52% and child car occupants by 72% showing more needs to be done to increase child pedestrian safety.
Progress towards 2020
The greatest reductions have been amongst car occupants. The proportion of KSIs made up of vulnerable road users has risen as overall KSIs have fallen. Improving the safety and security of transport and travelling in London remains a priority
The safety and security of transport and travelling in London remains a priority for the Mayor. The recent terror attacks in London and Manchester have highlighted the importance of ongoing efforts to reduce the likelihood and impact of these terrible incidents on London’s streets and public transport networks and to improve the safety and security of transport and travelling.
Reducing transport crime and further improving confidence to travel will be challenging in the context of global insecurity and the growth in hatred, intolerance and extremism, the threat of terrorist attacks on the road and transport system, financial constraints, a growing population and the impact of overcrowding on passenger behaviour, along with the changing risk and nature of crime. These challenges are increasing demands for policing and enforcement resources, as well as other important crime reduction and operational security measures.
In terms of crime levels on TfL’s public transport network, crime fell by over 50% between 2005/6 and 2016/17 – equivalent to almost 30,000 offences. While over the long term, crime has been falling on the public transport network, levels of crime on the system have seen small increases since 2014/15. The rate of crime in 2016/17 was 7.5 crimes per million passenger journeys, up from 7.0 in 2014/15 (which was the lowest rate on record). The increases in crime have largely been driven by an anticipated increase in reported sexual offences and an increase in low-level violence and public order offences.
Concerns about the risk of crime and disorder can act as a barrier to travel. Research commissioned by TfL shows that the majority of Londoners feel safe whilst using public transport.
In 2016:
- 11% of Londoners were very or quite worried about their personal security when using public transport in London
- 18% recalled an incident in the last three months which made them feel worried about their personal safety
Women, BAME and disabled Londoners are significantly more likely to be generally worried (very or quite) and have experienced a specific incident of worry in the last three months. Rising traffic and falling road capacity for private vehicles means that congestion will rise for essential traffic.
Congestion causes stress and frustration, and limits the amount people can travel because journeys are slow and unpredictable. For businesses, congestion costs money as workers spend time queuing in traffic, it is difficult to make deliveries on time, and an unreliable road network harms the reputation of London. Bus journeys become slower and less reliable.
Despite a falling car mode share, without further action traffic is expected to rise across much of London, with 8.6 million more kilometres travelled by road on average day in 2041 compared to 2015.
Over the same period, the amount of space available for use by general road traffic is expected to reduce by 3 per cent, more in central London.
Most congestion is caused by there being more traffic on a day-to-day basis than the there is space for – traffic management methods can help but ultimately we need to reduce traffic volumes.
Without further action, the average Londoner will waste 2.5 days a year sitting in congested traffic by 2041.
Forecast changes in distance & time spent travelling, 2041 (funded plan)
| Central | Inner | Outer | Greater London | |---------|-------|-------|----------------| | 30% | 21% | 12% | 10% |
Percentage change 2015 to 2041
-1% 6% 12% 10%
Distance travelled Time spent travelling
Causes of congestion
- Excess Traffic 75%
- Road & street works 7%
- Accidents 9%
- Special events 2%
- Breakdowns 2%
- Other 5% Industry trends and economic growth will lead to more freight traffic, especially vans.
90% of all freight is carried by road and freight adds an estimated £7.5 billion to the GVA of London. London’s continued success critically relies on safe, reliable, sustainable and efficient goods delivery and servicing.
Freight vehicles account for around a fifth of motorised vehicle kilometres travelled in London.
In the central London morning peak, freight accounts for around a third of traffic.
Between 2015 and 2041, freight vehicle kilometres are projected to increase by:
- +26% for vans
- +0% for trucks
Factors increasing freight traffic:
- **E-Commerce** - Deliveries to homes and personal deliveries to workplaces.
- **Just-in-time delivery** - Roads are becoming on-the-move warehouses.
- **Freight / logistics pushed to peripheral out-of-town areas**
- **Freight / logistics pulled to areas with good highway accessibility**
- **Globalisation of supply - lengthening supply chains.**
Changes in van traffic, 1994-9 to 2015
Source: DfT National Road Traffic Counts
© Crown copyright and database rights 2015 Ordnance Survey 100033971 For Healthy Streets, we need to achieve population and jobs growth without a matching rise in car travel.
At present, 57% of London households own a car, making 6.8m car trips per day. Car ownership is the strongest determinant of inactivity – 70% of people without a car do some activity compared to 50% with one car.
Since its invention, the car has provided welcome connectivity and opened up new opportunities. Even in a densely populated city such as London, some journeys can only reasonably be made by car. But the amount of space that can or should be taken up by private road transport is limited, and the population is growing.
As well as prioritising more space-efficient and sustainable modes, research suggests that most people agree that the limited remaining space should be prioritised for ‘essential’ traffic.
Some journeys are essential by car:
- No alternative mode available. 26% of car trips can’t be switched due to the characteristics of the trip-maker or the time taken.
- Unreasonable to use alternative, eg: in an emergency, when ill, if afraid of alternative.
- High value to society of driving eg: some business trips, if only way to access work.
But many are not:
- For example, Londoners tell us it is less essential for a trip to be made by car if it is in central London or a well connected area, can be made as quickly and easily by another mode, or if it is for leisure purposes or in some way ‘discretionary’.
Private cars, taxis and private hire vehicles take up three quarters of the road space used for personal travel in central London but account for just a fifth of the personal distance travelled. Three quarters of car trips could be made by a more sustainable mode, but many people are reluctant to change.
93% of car journeys under 2km have an alternative available, but just 16% of trips over 8km. Shorter trips are also more likely to have more than one alternative available. It’s more difficult to assess if the quarter of car journeys made in London by non-Londoners have an alternative available, but it is reasonable to assume that some do.
However, having an alternative available does not mean that people will switch. Delivering mode shift requires changes to people’s preferences, and to the relative appeal of travel by car and the alternatives. In reality, this means that car travel would need to be less appealing, and the other modes more appealing, in order to realise the potential that has been identified.
Some people are more amenable to change than others – the challenge is that the greatest amount of car use happens in places where people are most committed to travelling by car and least willing to change.
Potential for existing car journeys to be made by a sustainable mode
- 74% of car trips could be made by a sustainable mode
- 0.9m could be switched to any sustainable mode
- 0.9m could be made by public transport or cycled
- 0.8m could be walked or cycled
- 6k could be made by public transport or walked
- 2k could only be walked
- 0.4m could only be made by public transport
- 2.4m could only be cycled
Note: potential is based upon current service provision. If services were enhanced, more journeys could switch from car to public transport. A healthy environment Poor air quality damages health and causes the equivalent of up to 9,400 deaths per year.
**NOx emissions** Under the most recent government plans, London will not comply with legal limits for NO₂ until 2025, 15 years after the original deadline. About 25% of London’s roads are forecast to be non-compliant with NO₂ levels in 2020. Of these, about a third require reductions of between 25% and 50% of road transport NOx emissions, and a tenth require at least a 50% reduction.
**Particulate Matter (PM) emissions** Without further action, London is expected to exceed World Health Organisation levels of PM2.5 until well after 2030. 75% of road transport PM comes from tyre and brake wear. There are limited technological solutions so only a reduction in road traffic can effectively tackle PM in the medium/long term.
Transport is the biggest source of emissions damaging to health in London: around half of emissions (NOx and particulate matter (PM)) in Greater London come from road transport.
London is in breach of legal limits on NO₂ and while there is no safe level for particulates, does not meet levels recommended by the World Health Organisation of PM smaller than 2.5 micrograms.
The communities suffering most from poor air quality are often the most vulnerable. 360+ primary schools are in areas exceeding safe legal pollution levels.
**Annual mean NO₂ concentrations 2013**
**Baseline PM emissions from road transport, 2020 to 2050**
Note that forecasts are for future without MTS interventions. Action must be taken to reduce carbon emissions so London can play its part in tackling climate change.
Climate change is a serious threat to global quality of life. Carbon dioxide concentration is 40% higher than in pre-industrial times and between 1880 and 2012, the earth’s surface warmed 0.85°C Celsius.
London’s transport providers must play their part in delivering reductions in carbon emissions. The Mayor’s ultimate ambition is to make London a zero carbon city by 2050. While transport CO₂ emissions are projected to have fallen by more than 2 million tonnes by 2025 from 1990 levels, they will still be 2.35 million tonnes above the target previously set for 2025. Meeting this would require a reduction in emissions equivalent to a 40% reduction in road traffic.
Technological advances will reduce vehicle emissions but this will be made quicker and more feasible if the distance travelled by car is reduced.
London’s bus, taxis and private hire fleets are on a pathway to reach zero emission.
London’s rail services are primarily electric so CO₂ emissions will decline with the decarbonisation of the energy supply. Need the government to electrify all remaining diesel lines.
Emissions arise from the taxiing, take off and landing of aircraft at Heathrow and City Airport. Plans to expand Heathrow’s third runway are unclear on what this would mean for meeting the UK’s climate change targets. A biodiverse natural environment is good for nature and good for people
A biodiverse natural environment provides many physical and mental health benefits and aids access to green space.
Transport land accounts for 14% of land in London and 25% of land in central London. Therefore, how we use transport land has a significant impact on biodiversity in London.
Nationwide, the goal is to conserve biodiversity. This will be challenging given competing demands for land for housing and transport infrastructure.
As London becomes more urban, access to green space will become more important, and transport land can contribute.
Deficiencies in access to nature
Opportunities to provide green infrastructure on transport land include street trees, green roofs on buildings and roadside raingardens.
Noise from transport causes stress and damages the health of Londoners
The World Health Organisation identifies environmental noise as the second largest environmental risk to public health in Western Europe. Noise affects health directly by causing sleep disturbance, stress/anxiety and damage to mental health, high blood pressure, cognitive impairment in children (and related impacts on school performance) and increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Exposure to noise from transport damages the health of Londoners, particularly those living on busy roads or in the flight path.
More than 1.6 million people in the London are exposed to road traffic noise levels during the day above 55dB, the level defined by the World Health Organisation as causing health problems.
Three in ten London residents say they are disturbed by road traffic noise
One in five London residents say they are disturbed by aircraft noise.
Heathrow alone exposes 750,000 people to significant aircraft noise (above 55dBLden) – the majority of whom reside in west and southwest London – and which amounts to 28% of all those exposed to noise by airports across Europe. With a third runway, that number could increase to almost a million people. We must ensure the transport network is resilient to extreme weather and the adverse effects of climate change.
London is already suffering from the adverse effects of climate change – summers are getting warmer and winters are getting wetter. Major flooding has occurred in London in three of the last four years – causing significant disruption to transport and having a detrimental impact on the economy.
Unmitigated climate change would mean that the summer of 2003, where we broke the highest temperature record in the UK (37 °C) and an estimated 2,000 UK residents died, will be considered an average summer by the 2040s and a cool summer by the 2080s. Extreme weather events are expected to increase as a result of climate change.
For London to remain an attractive place to live, work and visit, we must ensure that the transport system is resilient to the extreme weather conditions likely to become more common as a result of a changing climate.
Flooding will affect stations, roads and tracks and cut power supplies, as in Feb 2014.
Humidity, drought, storm winds affect signalling, cause ground movement and debris on tracks.
Extreme heat will lead to materials failure and the need for ventilation and cooling.
Snow and ice will block drains; affect signalling; damage embankments, cuttings and roads.
Average surface temperature during the hot summer of 2006
The urban heat island effect is clearly visible here – average surface temperatures were six degrees centigrade cooler in Richmond Park than in central London.
Sustainable Drainage Systems, as pictured here (from a scheme on the TLRN), can reduce the risk of flooding while enhancing the green infrastructure of a local area. A good public transport experience London has become more unaffordable as housing and travel costs have risen faster than incomes.
Whilst the economy of London has grown, not all Londoners have shared in the benefits. London is one of the most expensive places to live in the world and yet more than a fifth of working Londoners do not receive the London Living Wage. In the early years of TfL, average earnings rose faster than fares, particularly bus fares which were frozen or reduced each year between 2005 and 2008.
Single Tube and Bus fares increased by around 60% between 2008 and 2015. While this allowed for significant investment in transport networks, those on the minimum wage saw their pay rise just 17%, making travel costs a larger proportion of their spending. Travel costs becoming unaffordable could make it harder for Londoners to make the journeys they need and want to by public transport.
In 2014 it took an extra hour of work at minimum wage to cover travel costs from outer London compared to 2005.
Even in the cheapest areas combined rent and travel costs over £800 pcm on average for a two person household. A good customer experience means consistently getting the basics right and being innovative.
Customers should be able to trust their transport providers to provide a good experience across the network, but overstretched services may struggle to deliver what customers want. Customers will expect services to respond to emerging technology and reflect cultural change - as expectations rise, it will become increasingly difficult to deliver the basics consistently in a crowded and congested environment.
Over time, what is considered essential changes. As mobile connectivity has soared, demand has risen for real time information they can access on their journey. As technology develops, customer needs and expectations will continue to evolve.
Open data provisions has facilitated the development of 360 apps.
What do customers want?
- Journeys that are reliable, easy to plan, stress-free, person-friendly and comfortable
- Value for money – so you get what you pay for, with fares, charges and fines considered fair and honest
- Progress and innovation, with investment in improvements
Customer experience is not consistent across all providers.
Rail customers in London and the South East are less satisfied than regional and long distance travellers, particularly with punctuality, value for money and room to sit or stand. In Autumn 2016, satisfaction varied by 26 percentage points between the best and worst performing operators.
Customer Satisfaction by rail operator, Autumn 2016 (NRPS)
- Thameslink Kent customers least satisfied (62%)
Major improvements in satisfaction with journey experience following the takeover of the franchise by London Overground.
What do customers want?
- Journeys that are reliable, easy to plan, stress-free, person-friendly and comfortable
- Value for money – so you get what you pay for, with fares, charges and fines considered fair and honest
- Progress and innovation, with investment in improvements
Customer Satisfaction on London Overground
Customer Satisfaction by rail operator, Autumn 2016 (NRPS)
- Thameslink Kent customers least satisfied (62%) Significant improvements have been made but 41% of the public transport network is still not fully accessible.
An inclusive, accessible, affordable transport network benefits all Londoners. Whilst significant improvements have been made, journey times are still considerably longer on the accessible network and a number of barriers to travel remain. Partly as a result of this, disabled people travel less often, making 1.6 trips per person per day compared to 2.4 for those without a disability.
Demand for accessible services is rising. By 2041, the number of Londoners over 70 will have grown by 85% and 17% of Londoners (1.8m people) will have some form of disability – 56% more than 2011.
**What does an accessible and inclusive transport service mean?**
- Helpful staff, particularly bus drivers, provide a good customer experience
- Street environment is well maintained, without obstructions, overcrowded or narrow pavements, and with places to stop and rest.
- Step-free access to bus stops, buses, stations and trains
- Everyone can access the information they need to plan their journeys
- Services are not too crowded
**Comparison of the number of jobs available within 45 minutes for total and accessible network**
| Total network | Accessible network | |---------------|--------------------| | Total jobs | Total jobs | | millions | millions | | > 2.0 | > 2.0 | | 1.5 to 2.0 | 1.5 to 2.0 | | 1.0 to 1.5 | 1.0 to 1.5 | | 0.5 to 1.0 | 0.5 to 1.0 | | < 0.5 | < 0.5 | Bus demand has fallen away somewhat recently, after many years of rises. Bus patronage has declined by 5.6% across 2015/16 and 2016/17 with ridership for 2016/17 123 million trips per annum lower than in 2014/15. The primary cause is considered to be the deterioration in bus speeds (2.1% year-on-year). The deterioration varies route by route, and is closely aligned with usage. Bus use has also been affected by the trend for Londoners to travel less, particularly for shopping and leisure.
In future, bus journeys will be affected by rising congestion on the network. Analysis has shown that many of those who reduced their bus use, drove more. This shows the risk if London’s bus services are not able to offer an appealing option to the car. Maintaining acceptable bus speeds and reliability is a vital part of delivering sustainable growth in future.
The size of the bus network - more than 95% of households live within 400m of a bus stop - and the affordability of bus services mean that it is the most accessible and most used type of public transport in London, carrying 2.3 billion passengers per year. London’s bus network now carries half of all the bus journeys in England. London buses operate on nearly 700 routes, with 100 routes operating through the night.
Buses are a space-efficient and affordable mode of transport but falling speeds worsen the experience for users.
Bus demand is expected to grow by 30% by 2041, especially in east London.
The flexibility of bus service provision to respond to new and changing demand patterns and to fill gaps in connectivity means that buses are key role in delivering mode shift from the car. Bus services are more viable than rail where demand is widely dispersed. To reduce car dependency, buses will need to offer similar journey speeds and convenience for passengers.
Bus demand has fallen away somewhat recently, after many years of rises. Bus patronage has declined by 5.6% across 2015/16 and 2016/17 with ridership for 2016/17 123 million trips per annum lower than in 2014/15. The primary cause is considered to be the deterioration in bus speeds (2.1% year-on-year). The deterioration varies route by route, and is closely aligned with usage. Bus use has also been affected by the trend for Londoners to travel less, particularly for shopping and leisure.
In future, bus journeys will be affected by rising congestion on the network. Analysis has shown that many of those who reduced their bus use, drove more. This shows the risk if London’s bus services are not able to offer an appealing option to the car. Maintaining acceptable bus speeds and reliability is a vital part of delivering sustainable growth in future. Despite tube & rail upgrades & the Elizabeth line, demand will increase faster than supply, exacerbating crowding.
Customers find travelling in crowded conditions stressful and unsatisfying. Some groups are particularly affected, for example, those with mobility impairments for example find it difficult to travel in crowded conditions.
Crowding increases journey times, as customers wait for a less crowded train, damaging real-world connectivity. Crowding within stations leads to closures and delays walking through the station.
Funded projects through to the early 2020s add 70% extra capacity to the national rail network and 50% to the LU, DLR and Tram network. However demand will outstrip supply by 2031 with a significant increase in crowding by 2041.
Crowding on London’s rail network, 2041, with funded schemes only
- Additional daytime journeys to/from central London
- Increase in crowding on London Underground
- Increase in crowding on National Rail service Crowding in stations causes delays and frustration and will become more common as London grows.
The same demographic and economic factors that lead to busier trains will result in increased passenger numbers at stations across the network. The most significant challenge will arise in central London, where demand for travel at peak periods will rise substantially, placing pressure on key destination stations and interchanges. Congestion within stations leads to delays as passengers move slowly through the station, are forced to wait to board trains, or are held outside the station as safety concerns force temporary closures.
Those stations in most need of upgrade works, either due to current conditions or because there is likely to be particularly high growth in the vicinity, have been identified.
The map below shows the top 21 locations in 2016 with the highest levels of passenger disbenefit from gateline closures. Many of the highlighted stations are National Rail interchanges where passengers are interchanging onto LU lines that are already crowded on their approaches to the station.
By 2041, planned station control measures may be required at 30 key stations. This includes LU stations serving each of the six major National Rail termini. The closure of an LU station at a terminus – even for a short time – will add significant pressure to the wider network.
London Underground stations with greatest disbenefit from gateline closures, 2016
The vicinity of key rail termini and Tube destination stations often offers poor amenity and crowded pavements, failing to provide a Healthy Street environment. Passenger safety should always be a top priority
Londoners rightly expect their public transport services to be operated safely and to be managed and policed to ensure their personal security.
After many years of safe operation, there was a major derailment at Sandilands junction in November 2016 in which seven people lost their lives and over 50 people were injured. This tragedy serves as a reminder that safety is paramount.
There has been a consistent trend of improvement in bus or coach passenger injuries over the past decade. In 2015/16, 71 bus or coach occupants were injured with one fatality. On London Underground there were 93 passenger injuries and three fatalities.
People are more likely to be killed or injured by a bus whilst walking or cycling than whilst travelling by bus. In the last three years there were on average 200 people killed or seriously injured in collisions involving buses or coaches. New homes and jobs London is vital to economic growth across the UK – it is the most productive region and the UK’s only global centre.
London’s position as an internationally competitive centre for global business services brings trade not just to London but to the UK as a whole. In 2014, London accounted for around 23% of UK’s economic output, a rise from around 19% in 1997. 45% of GVA was generated in just six central Boroughs – making this the most productive part of the UK.
The centre hosts a cluster of globally competitive sectors, and accommodates a third of London’s jobs in just 2% of its area. Central London and the Isle of Dogs, will see the most employment growth in future.
Central London has grown more than elsewhere, yet compared to other similar cities there remains scope to increase its density & productivity.
The economic clout of central London has helped London to top many world city rankings - need to maintain that position.
Earnings differential (representing productivity) by employment density
Earnings are between 2 and 5 times higher than UK average where employment density is highest.
Note: GVA stands for Gross Value Added and is a measure of economic growth. R&D stands for Research and Development. Jobs in central London depend on rail capacity; by 2041 demand will outstrip supply, possibly limiting growth.
Ready access to a very large population catchment, supplied by the rail network, is fundamental to London’s ability to act as a global employment hub. Agglomeration benefits are dependent on businesses being close together and having access to a large and diverse pool of skilled labour. Eight in ten commuters arrive in central London by rail. Businesses depend on the system being able to deliver people reliably from where they live to where they work at times they are prepared to travel. This means that both the capacity and performance of the transport system are critical. If the central London economy was to be constrained as a result of transport problems, estimates suggest that this could result in an annual loss to national output of approximately £70 billion or 5.4% of GDP.
Fully funded projects through to the early 2020s add 70% extra capacity to the national rail network (including Elizabeth Line) & 50% to the LU, DLR and Tram network but demand still outstrips supply by 2041, demonstrating the need for further investment in major schemes such as Crossrail 2 to provide necessary capacity to central London.
7.6 million working age people will be able to access central London in 45 minutes by 2041. Beyond the centre, travel is more car dependent but town centres could become sustainable travel hubs
London contains twelve metropolitan town centres – many similar in size to the centres of major cities across the UK – as well as 35 major centres and 147 district centres. At least four in ten journeys made by London residents start or end in a town centre, primarily for shopping but also to work, access services and for leisure purposes.
As our shopping habits change, the role of town centres is changing accordingly. Retail is consolidating in larger centres, meaning that smaller centres are becoming less viable over time. In general, we can see that the denser the area in 2011 in terms of retail units, the greater the increase in density since. Conversely, town centres have an increasing role as leisure destinations and residential locations, resulting in more evening travel.
Town centres typically also act as transport hubs, with larger town centres all served by Tube or rail services and multiple bus routes. Whilst London residents are less likely to drive to town centres than other destinations, nevertheless, three in ten trips to a town centre is made by car.
Non-Londoners also visit London’s town centres, often by car, so this is likely to underestimate the overall car mode share.
Research has found that people accessing town centres by active modes and bus spend more per month than car users.
Mode share of trips to town centres, London residents
On an average day, London residents make 1.5 million car trips to a town centre
Map of London’s town centres London needs 50,000 new homes a year but is delivering half that - transport investment can unlock development.
To accommodate population growth and tackle the existing housing shortage, 50,000 new homes are needed every year, but only around half the homes that Londoners need have actually been delivered in recent years. Transport improves the viability of developments and creates new markets. Homes in the best connected areas command a price premium – currently 2.5% for Crossrail 1 above surrounding areas.
Need to build a new home every 11 minutes, 24 hours a day for the next 25 years.
Three quarters of London’s businesses consider housing a threat to the economy.
The consequences of failing to meet housing needs could be:
- Prices rise;
- Some people who would have lived in London live elsewhere;
- Housing is only delivered in places with the highest land values and elsewhere, properties are sub-divided;
- People are forced to live further away from where they work and in areas with poorer transport accessibility;
- Overcrowding rises and the amount of space per person falls.
Completed housing units by transport accessibility of area
Since 2005 half of residential development has been in the best connected parts of London.
People will pay a 10% price premium to live close to a station. Many of the areas with the greatest capacity for development have poor transport connectivity, hampering development.
Opportunity Areas are the largest reservoir of brownfield land and could make entirely new places for Londoners to live and work, but many of the areas with the greatest capacity for development have poor transport connectivity and this has directly limited private sector investment in housing.
Beyond these growth areas, densification and development is constrained in parts of London with poorer access to the rail network, and in particular in south London where the connectivity offered by the National Rail network is considerably poorer than in other regions.
Investing in new public transport capacity, cycling and walking could unlock the delivery of thousands of homes that may not otherwise come forward for development. London’s low density sprawl has contributed to high car use, places should make sustainable travel choices easy.
High density living influences travel in a number of ways, such as by increasing the number of activities that can be carried out locally, or through making car use less attractive as a result of increased competition for road space and parking. People are less likely to drive if they have ready access to good alternatives and don’t need a car for work. As London’s population grows, population density will increase, contributing to a fall in the car mode share. But around half of Londoners will still live in lower density regions which typically are reliant on the car. The situation, design and connectivity of new housing will determine the travel patterns of its residents. Simply put, places ‘built for the car’ generate more car travel than places ‘built for sustainable travel’.
People living in housing with more or better parking are more likely to own and use a car than similar people with poorer parking options. Of households with a car, households with off street parking had 1.8 cars on average compared to 1.4 cars for households with permitted on-street parking.
People choose housing that meets their needs
Parking is more important to people who own (or want to own) a car
Developments with better parking appeal to car owners
Developments with more parking end up with a higher proportion of car owners
People who own cars use them – generating more car trips where there is more parking
The proportion of people driving to work falls as population density rises
Car use rises as public transport accessibility falls Conclusion Conclusion
London will be bigger than ever with 32m trips daily. 70% will be by PT and active modes, but without further action traffic will rise with more car and many more van kilometres on the roads. Growth places pressure on the transport network but brings considerable economic benefits to London and the UK.
There is an opportunity to deliver a bigger, better city by investing in transport:
1. Healthy Streets can create vibrant, clean, safe and inclusive places and encourage people to be active.
2. We can build on our unrivalled success in delivering mode shift from the car to deliver a world-leading sustainable travel mode share.
3. We have proven the benefits of investing in public transport and focussing on our customers.
However, failing to meet our challenges risks:
1. Jobs growth won’t materialise & high value jobs will go to global centres outside the UK.
2. But population growth - largely driven by an ageing population – is likely to continue risking worsening conditions.
3. Unhealthy streets and a worsening customer experience on the transport network.
We face a number of key challenges:
Delivering Healthy Streets that meet expectations and tackle the physical inactivity crisis threatening health Reducing emissions to minimise the health impact of transport and work towards a zero carbon London Tackling car use and prioritising streets for active modes, buses and essential car and freight traffic Ensuring the transport network is accessible, fair, affordable and safe for all Delivering a reliable public transport service despite growing passenger numbers Support the delivery of the homes and jobs that London needs through investing in transport
Fundamentally, our challenge is to manage the competing demands for space and meet our goals by:
Delivering mode shift from the car to walking, cycling and public transport Supporting growth through the provision of new public transport capacity to employment hubs Ensure new homes are delivered in a way that makes it easy for people to choose sustainable modes ‘Keeping up’ and ensuring technological advances deliver a better London
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4029-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 47,
"total-input-tokens": 80345,
"total-output-tokens": 14055,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
86,
1
],
[
86,
1585,
2
],
[
1585,
2610,
3
],
[
2610,
2644,
4
],
[
2644,
4408,
5
],
[
4408,
5677,
6
],
[
5677,
6514,
7
],
[
6514,
7457,
8
],
[
7457,
7472,
9
],
[
7472,
8517,
10
],
[
8517,
9744,
11
],
[
9744,
12241,
12
],
[
12241,
13003,
13
],
[
13003,
13024,
14
],
[
13024,
14694,
15
],
[
14694,
15256,
16
],
[
15256,
15291,
17
],
[
15291,
16442,
18
],
[
16442,
18741,
19
],
[
18741,
20287,
20
],
[
20287,
22522,
21
],
[
22522,
24087,
22
],
[
24087,
25236,
23
],
[
25236,
26884,
24
],
[
26884,
28475,
25
],
[
28475,
28497,
26
],
[
28497,
30017,
27
],
[
30017,
31431,
28
],
[
31431,
33465,
29
],
[
33465,
35174,
30
],
[
35174,
35209,
31
],
[
35209,
36312,
32
],
[
36312,
38426,
33
],
[
38426,
40012,
34
],
[
40012,
42708,
35
],
[
42708,
43687,
36
],
[
43687,
45317,
37
],
[
45317,
46244,
38
],
[
46244,
46263,
39
],
[
46263,
47493,
40
],
[
47493,
48831,
41
],
[
48831,
50427,
42
],
[
50427,
51745,
43
],
[
51745,
52598,
44
],
[
52598,
54262,
45
],
[
54262,
54273,
46
],
[
54273,
56404,
47
]
]
} |
7b9af118e001e7f8be71336199f440b508839605 | BUSINESS INTEREST GROUP: LOCAL TAX FLEXIBILITIES
1. Over Summer 2016, we consulted on two measures to enhance local tax flexibilities, the introduction of an Infrastructure Levy, and a power to reduce the local business rate multiplier. Both of these proposals were first announced by the former Chancellor at the Autumn Statement 2015. We are currently analysing consultation responses on these proposals, and discussing with Ministers how to approach the outstanding policy questions. This paper seeks to share an overview of consultation responses with the Group, and seeks the Group’s views on these outstanding design and implementation questions.
2. The driving aim behind these proposals is to increase local authorities’ flexibility and control over the levers to promote growth within their areas, be that by a structural reduction to business rate charges, or by levying a supplement on businesses to fund infrastructure projects to enhance the area’s economic vitality and business environment.
Infrastructure Levy
3. The Infrastructure Levy proposal will allow the Mayors of Combined Authorities to add a supplement to business rates across their area of up to 2p in the pound, and to use the revenue to fund a specified infrastructure project. The Mayor will need to set out the full detail of the project, including cost and the duration the levy will be in place. Respondents supported the proposal that the Mayor should do this through a detailed prospectus. S/he will then need to follow a process for approving the introduction of the levy, which will be set out in legislation.
4. This proposal was broadly welcomed by consultees, although many thought the power should be extended from Mayoral Combined Authorities to all authorities. Whilst it is clear that many authorities would like to be able to take advantage of this measure to deliver on local infrastructure priorities, the Infrastructure Levy (IL), as distinct from the BRS power which does apply to all authorities, others argue that the IL is intended to recognise the particular position of elected Mayors of Combined Authorities.
5. The area that generated the most discussion was the approval mechanism for a new IL, specifically the extent of LEPs’ involvement. A large number of respondents, from different sectors, were uncomfortable with the final power to approve an IL, as a tax-raising initiative, resting with member of the LEP, as an unelected body. Local authority respondents in particular argued that such a power should rest with a democratically elected and accountable individual (a Mayor) or body (a Council). Some business respondents would prefer to have a ballot of businesses to approve a new levy, akin to the requirements for introducing a Business Rate Supplement (BRS), whilst other respondents wanted to see a Mayor required to consult local businesses on their proposal. We are therefore considering whether alternative arrangements which seek to foreground the democratic legitimacy of an elected Mayor, whilst also ensuring a clear role for LEPs, as a body reflective of local businesses’ views could be brought forward.
6. Local authority respondents were keen that the definition of the “infrastructure” that may be funded through a levy should be broad, with many thinking the definition used for the Community Infrastructure Levy - roads and transport; flood defences; educational facilities; medical facilities; sporting and recreational facilities and open spaces – would be appropriate. This definition also has the added benefit of being familiar. Business respondents largely preferred a narrower definition, and again looked to the BRS legislation, which precludes BRS funds being used for housing, educational or health etc. facilities.
7. In terms of whether an MCA should be allowed to charge multiple infrastructure levies, the largest proportion of respondents – businesses and local authorities – agreed that they should, as long as their combined total did not exceed 2p in the pound. Each component of the IL should be used to fund a specific project.
8. We asked respondents their views on the rateable value threshold above which an IL may be imposed, and whether MCAs should have the flexibility to vary these in accordance with local rent levels, to ensure that they can all raise a viable amount from an IL, or if Government should set a rateable value threshold. Broadly speaking, local authorities were keen to be able to reflect rateable values in their areas in an IL, and business respondents wanted to ensure protections for small businesses.
**Power to reduce the multiplier**
09. The power to reduce the multiplier will allow local authorities to make a reduction to the national business rate multiplier and the national small business rate multiplier, which will be applicable to all hereditaments in their area.
10. This proposal received a cautious reaction at consultation, with many local authority respondents questioning whether it is a power they would use, and suggesting that giving them a flexibility to increase the multiplier would be more helpful. There was also discussion of the potential impact of a multiplier reduction on a neighbouring authority.
11. A key principle to emerge from the consultation was that those choosing to reduce their multiplier should bear the financial impact of doing so. This is obviously most relevant to two tier and combined authority areas, and we are now considering how this can most equitably be implemented, whilst ensuring that all authorities are able to exercise this flexibility.
12. Consultation respondents also expressed their views on how a local authority should be able to return their local multiplier to the national multiplier level, and whether Government should impose any capping of increases, or staggering of the return. Broadly, local authorities considered that, in order that they may consider reducing their multiplier, they would need the certainty of being able to return to the national level in a single move; whereas business groups expressed concern at the potential for a single, steep increase in business rate bills.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/4030-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 5090,
"total-output-tokens": 1236,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
3666,
1
],
[
3666,
6158,
2
]
]
} |
fd4599affc1ad455c0c73afa0cc1195a7cf38a7c | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
Requests for information regarding complaints in the last five financial years
Request
For each of the last five financial years, please provide the following information:
1. The number of complaints made to the CPS.
2. The number of legal complaints.
3. The number of non-legal complaints.
4. Please provide a definition and if possible examples of what constitutes a legal complaint and what constitutes a non-legal complaint.
5. The breakdown of complaints by resolution.
6. If possible, please also provide a breakdown of the complaints by complaint type, or whichever subcategories you use to categorise complaints
Response
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) holds data regarding the number of complaints relating to Legal Decisions, Mixed (Legal and Non-Legal) Decisions and Non Legal Decisions made, received each financial year since 2014/15 until 2018/19. This data can be found in the attached table and should be read in conjunction with the caveats appended to it.
Definitions and examples of legal and non-legal complaints are published on the CPS website. Due to the accessibility of this data we are not obliged to provide a response to part four in accordance with section 21 of the FOIA – Information accessible by other means. Please see the attached Section 17 Refusal Notice for an explanation of this exemption.
For assistance, the information requested in part four can be located within our Feedback and Complaints Guidance which can be accessed via the following links:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/feedback-and-complaints The CPS records the number of complaints that were not upheld, part upheld, upheld and withdrawn. The outcome of a complaint is the resolution of the last stage recorded for each complaint. Please see the attached table for this data.
The CPS does not centrally hold a breakdown of the nature of a Legal, Non-Legal or a Mixed complaint. In order to retrieve this information it would be necessary to manually extract the specific nature of a complaint as recorded by the local CPS Area/Central Casework Unit in which the complaint originated.
As an indication of the work this would involve there were a total of 983 resolved complaints, at the first stage of the complaints process and beyond, during the most recent financial year 2018/19 alone.
Section 12(1) of the Freedom of Information Act means public authorities are not obliged to comply with a request for information if it estimates the cost of complying would exceed the appropriate limit. The appropriate limit for central government is set at £600. This represents the estimated cost of one person spending 3.5 working days determining whether the department holds the information, locating, retrieving and extracting the information.
A manual examination of in excess of 983 complaints would therefore exceed the appropriate cost limit and we are therefore not obliged to respond to part six of your request.
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0392-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 3303,
"total-output-tokens": 719,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1591,
1
],
[
1591,
3026,
2
]
]
} |
ecda087ef6cb16d60de524a15af5f2df7de93a22 | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
Breakdown of all costs to the CPS in relation to the extradition of Hashem Abedi
Request
Please provide a breakdown of all known costs to the Crown Prosecution Service in relation to the extradition of Hashem Abedi from Libya.
Response
In response to the above request prior to making the request for extradition, CPS prosecutors worked closely with the police to provide early investigatory advice and to reach a charging decision in accordance with the Code for Crown Prosecutors.
As of 29th August 2019, the approximate CPS staff costs incurred was £48,259. We can confirm no CPS counsel costs were incurred in relation to the extradition.
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0393-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1495,
"total-output-tokens": 214,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
746,
1
]
]
} |
240e1ea4f41041591cfc6c1c2d7b1337c74d0f10 | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
During 2018, how many prosecutions post charge were halted due to the untimely death of the alleged offender
Request
During the calendar year 2018 how many prosecutions post charge were halted due to the untimely death of the alleged offender
Response
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Case Management System indicates that during the calendar year 2018, an outcome of ‘Death of the Defendant’ was recorded against 820 defendants(^1). Please note that as with any large scale recording system, this data is subject to possible errors with data entry and processing.
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
(^1) The CPS uses ‘Defendant’ to describe a person who has been charged or summoned
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0394-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1517,
"total-output-tokens": 227,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
759,
1
]
]
} |
78d85438340c7dcbfe23a4cfeb884d249c7d4814 | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
The department’s policy regarding retention and disposal of data under the Data Protection Act 2018
Request
1. Please can you detail the department’s policy in relation to the retention and disposal of data in accordance with the Data Protection Act 2018?
2. Please can you detail the formal process for recording the retention and/or disclosure and/or disposal of a subject’s data?
3. Please can you confirm how an individual is able to request that their data be reviewed for deletion/disposal?
Response
In response to questions one and two, may I refer you to ‘Retention of your personal data’ which can be found in the department’s Privacy Notice available from our website and to assist you, please use the following link: Privacy notice
The information you have requested is exempt from disclosure as it is contained on the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) website. As the information is ‘reasonably accessible to the applicant by other means’, it is exempt from disclosure under Section 21 of the FOI Act. Please see the attached Section 17 Notice which provides details of this exemption.
Under Section 16 of the FOI Act we have an obligation to advise what, if any, information may assist you with your request. For ease of reference please click on the links below which will take you to the relevant parts of our website that contain the information you have requested:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/how-make-request-under-data-protection-act-2018
https://www.cps.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/publications/Rights-Request-Form-2019.docx
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0396-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 2844,
"total-output-tokens": 425,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1598,
1
],
[
1598,
1598,
2
]
]
} |
ded04f6c12dfc6a228969fc89c833e14b4d63beb | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
The possibility of being able to obtain access to anonymised witness statements from cases in which there has been a successful prosecution in coercive control.
Request
I was wondering if there was any possibilities that I might be able obtain access to anonymised witness statements from cases in which there has been a successful prosecution in coercive control once I have had the opportunity to submit a full research proposal for your consideration first?
Response
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) prosecutes criminal cases that have been investigated by police and other investigative organisations in England and Wales. Witness statements are submitted to the CPS by the investigative organisation as part of a criminal case.
In order to access the material referred to in your request it would be necessary to manually examine the relevant cases. As an indication of the work this would involve the CPS commenced prosecutions in the equivalent of 1,070 cases up to the end of March 2018 since the offence came into force.
Section 12(1) of the FOI Act means public authorities are not obliged to comply with a request for information if it estimates the cost of complying would exceed the appropriate limit. The appropriate limit for central government it is set at £600. This represents the estimated cost of one person spending 3.5 working days determining whether the department holds the information, and locating, retrieving and extracting the information.
We believe that the cost of reviewing the equivalent of 1,070 cases in order to retrieve the relevant material would exceed the appropriate cost limit. Consequently, we are not obliged to comply with your request.
Under section 16 of the Freedom of Information Act we have a duty to advise what, if any, information may assist you with your request. The annually published CPS Violence against Women and Girls’ (VAWG) report contains data which you may find useful. Data for 2018/19 will be published later this year, however the most recent report for 2017/18 data can be accessed via the following link:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/violence-against-women-and-girls-data
The Ministry of Justice (MoJ) hold published case outcome statistics which show the prosecution outcome, including conviction, by individual offences. Their Case Outcomes by Offence Data Tool provides this information for the offence to which you refer. A request can be made to the MoJ via the following link:
https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/ministry-of-justice
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0899 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0397-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 3126,
"total-output-tokens": 631,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1871,
1
],
[
1871,
2623,
2
]
]
} |
866c33439f96ad4ce524419fb19808c4464848cb | s17 Notice under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
WITHHOLDING INFORMATION
Section 21(1) - Information accessible to applicant by other means.
(1) Information which is reasonably accessible to the applicant otherwise than under section 21 is exempt information.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)—
(a) information may be reasonably accessible to the applicant even though it is accessible only on payment, and
(b) information is to be taken to be reasonably accessible to the applicant if it is information which the public authority or any other person is obliged by or under any enactment to communicate (otherwise than by making the information available for inspection) to members of the public on request, whether free of charge or on payment.
(3) For the purposes of subsection (1), information which is held by a public authority and does not fall within subsection (2)(b) is not to be regarded as reasonably accessible to the applicant merely because the information is available from the public authority itself on request, unless the information is made available in accordance with the authority’s publication scheme and any payment required is specified in, or determined in accordance with, the scheme.
Section 21 is an absolute exemption which means there is no requirement to carry out a public interest test if the requested information is exempt.
Section 31(1)(c) – Information which is not exempt information by virtue of section 30 is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the administration of justice
The disclosure of internal process documents such as this could inhibit the ability of the CPS to conduct proceedings fairly. This is a qualified exemption which means that the decision to disclose the requested material is subject to the public interest test.
It may assist you to understand the decision if the public interest factors taken into account in this case is explained:
Public interest factors for disclosure:
To increase public understanding of the CPS decision making and prosecuting process
Public interest factors against disclosure:
The CPS publishes its policy guidance relating to Feedback and Complaints on its website in order to be transparent and increase the public understanding of our complaints handling procedure.
However, some information needs to be withheld to protect those involved with the complaints handling process. The CPS’ internal Feedback and Complaints guidance is there to support those involved in the handling of complaints. Disclosure to the world at large would impede the work of those working in this process. It is in the public interest that CPS is confident in its ability to handle complaints effectively, sensitively, fairly and thoroughly without prejudice to its processes.
On balance, I consider the public interest favours maintaining the exemption.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0398-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 3103,
"total-output-tokens": 633,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1718,
1
],
[
1718,
2907,
2
]
]
} |
91b88bbfb0792d01d8217d7a5c40b5827acf32e9 | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
Number of requests the CPS has received from the US Department of Justice and/or US Attorney General to interview individuals in the UK
Request
- The number of requests the CPS has received from the US Department of Justice and/or US Attorney General to interview individuals in the UK as part of an investigation into Huawei; and
- Documents related to requests the CPS have received from the US Department of Justice and/or US Attorney General to interview individuals in the UK as part of an investigation into Huawei.
Response
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) holds no information as described in your request above. It should be noted any such requests from the US would go to UKCA who would then liaise with the Police with regards to this. For ease of reference UKCA details can be found below:
https://www.gov.uk/guidance/mutual-legal-assistance-mla-requests
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0399-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1585,
"total-output-tokens": 256,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
973,
1
]
]
} |
161c14121f90a5e3868a558537976770ab028142 | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
An aggregate figure that Christopher Halliwell cost the CPS
Request
Can you provide an aggregate figure that Christopher Halliwell has cost the CPS?
Response
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) interprets the named defendant in your request to be a high profile individual convicted of murder at Bristol Crown Court in October 2012 and September 2016.
Generally, where a request is made regarding prosecution costs, the CPS will endeavour to provide counsels costs only. This is because the CPS does not record time spent by internal lawyers, paralegals and administrative staff on a case by case basis. Therefore unless we, the Information Management Unit, are informed otherwise, we can therefore only provide counsel costs.
The CPS does hold a record of counsel costs incurred in respect of the above named individual. The aggregated costs are £56,977.54.
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0400-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1559,
"total-output-tokens": 262,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
963,
1
]
]
} |
ae5fd066ec6372020fa6e1b7cfac237e6dafd05e | Our ref: 8677
s17 Notice under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
WITHHOLDING INFORMATION
Section 21(1) - Information accessible to applicant by other means.
(1) Information which is reasonably accessible to the applicant otherwise than under section 21 is exempt information.
(2) For the purposes of subsection (1)—
(a) information may be reasonably accessible to the applicant even though it is accessible only on payment, and
(b) information is to be taken to be reasonably accessible to the applicant if it is information which the public authority or any other person is obliged by or under any enactment to communicate (otherwise than by making the information available for inspection) to members of the public on request, whether free of charge or on payment.
(3) For the purposes of subsection (1), information which is held by a public authority and does not fall within subsection (2)(b) is not to be regarded as reasonably accessible to the applicant merely because the information is available from the public authority itself on request, unless the information is made available in accordance with the authority’s publication scheme and any payment required is specified in, or determined in accordance with, the scheme.
Section 21 is an absolute exemption which means there is no requirement to carry out a public interest test if the requested information is exempt.
Section 31(1)(c) – Information which is not exempt information by virtue of section 30 is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the administration of justice
The disclosure of internal process documents such as this could inhibit the ability of the CPS to conduct proceedings fairly. This is a qualified exemption which means that the decision to disclose the requested material is subject to the public interest test.
It may assist you to understand the decision if the public interest factors taken into account in this case is explained:
*Public interest factors for disclosure:*
To increase public understanding of the CPS decision making and prosecuting process
*Public interest factors against disclosure:*
The CPS publishes its policy guidance relating to Feedback and Complaints on its website in order to be transparent and increase the public understanding of our complaints handling procedure.
However, some information needs to be withheld to protect those involved with the complaints handling process. The CPS’ internal Feedback and Complaints guidance is there to support those involved in the handling of complaints. Disclosure to the world at large would impede the work of those working in this process. It is in the public interest that CPS is confident in its ability to handle complaints effectively, sensitively, fairly and thoroughly without prejudice to its processes.
On balance, I consider the public interest favours maintaining the exemption.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0401-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 3103,
"total-output-tokens": 647,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1733,
1
],
[
1733,
2926,
2
]
]
} |
0ea860ba774bb4c4b99d2973acc2d10c0d307fef | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
CPS policies regarding dealing with disabilities/emails/hate crimes/abuse
Request
Please provide your policies on
1. Dealing with people with disabilities
2. Dealing with emails
3. Dealing with hate crimes
4. Dealing with abuse
Response
You supplied details relating to previous correspondence with the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) within the email chain containing your FoI request.
Based upon those details, we have interpreted point one of your request to be for CPS policies in relation to our engagement with members of the public with disabilities.
Our “CPS 2020 inclusion and community engagement strategy” is published on the CPS website. Our “Public consultation on Mental Health Conditions and Disorders: Draft Legal Guidance” has also been recently published on the CPS website.
As both documents are published they are withheld under section 21 of the Freedom of Information Act (FoIA) – information accessible by other means. Please see the attached section 17 refusal notice for a more detailed explanation of this exemption.
Under section 16 of the FoIA we have an obligation to advise what, if any information may assist you with your request. The publications can be accessed on the CPS website via the following links:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/cps-2020-inclusion-and-community-engagement-strategy The CPS has interpreted point two to refer to policies relating to our email communication with members of the public.
Policy guidance held within the scope of point two relates to Feedback and Complaints.
The CPS publishes its Feedback and Complaints Guidance on its website. The publication is therefore withheld under section 21 of the FoI Act. Our internal policy guidance regarding Feedback and Complaints is withheld under section 31 – law enforcement. Please see the attached section 17 notice for an explanation of this exemption.
Under section 16 of the FoIA advice and assistance, the CPS’ published Feedback and Complaints Guidance can be accessed via the following link. Information considered the most appropriate to point two, can be found on page 13.
https://www.cps.gov.uk/feedback-and-complaints
The CPS publishes operational information relating to “Hate Crime” which includes a leaflet titled “What is Hate Crime and what to do about it.”
This information, along with all other published information detailed below is withheld under section 21 of the FoIA. Under section 16 of the FoIA, for advice and assistance relevant links to the CPS website relating to the information described below are provided:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/hate-crime
The CPS publishes prosecution guidance and public statements regarding hate crimes, including “Disability Hate Crime.” The legal guidance on disability hate crime can be accessed via the following link:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/disability-hate-crime-and-other-crimes-against-disabled-people-prosecution-guidance
The public statement relating to disability hate crime can be accessed on the CPS website via the following links:
Public statement on prosecuting disability hate crime and other crimes against disabled people
The CPS has interpreted point four to refer to our operational policies regarding alleged criminal activity involving abuse.
Prosecution Guidance relating to criminal offences, including those that involve forms of abuse can be found on our website. Under section 21 of the FoIA the guidance is withheld as it is accessible by other means. Under section 16 of the FoIA, advice and assistance, the guidance can be accessed via the following link:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/prosecution-guidance
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0402-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 3,
"total-input-tokens": 4697,
"total-output-tokens": 908,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1379,
1
],
[
1379,
3518,
2
],
[
3518,
3733,
3
]
]
} |
7289bf10eecb24082fbaf6c3c5500dd440644881 | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
The number of women arrested and convicted between 2009 and 2019 for terrorism-related offences
Request
The exact number of women arrested and convicted within the years spanning from 30 September 2009 – 30 September 2019 for terrorism related offences disaggregated by religion, ethnicity and type of offence.
Response
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) does not hold that data you have requested.
Under section 16 of the FoIA we have an obligation to advise what, if any information may assist you with your request. The Home Office published terrorism statistics: The publication can be accessed using the following link below:
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/operation-of-police-powers-under-the-terrorism-act-2000-quarterly-update-to-june-2019
Please note arrest data is a matter for the police and you should submit your Freedom of Information request to them.
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0403-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1583,
"total-output-tokens": 279,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
982,
1
]
]
} |
fd648f7aa6227ee0d06b57f3827d7a65933d61e4 | Ref: 8708
Section 17 Notice under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
WITHHOLDING INFORMATION
Section 40(2) – Personal Data Relating To Third Parties
The information you have requested contains personal data. The sensitive personal data consists of personal data relating to the commission, or alleged commission, of an offence. Personal data can only be released if to do so would not contravene any of the data protection principles set out by Article 5 of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
*Personal data shall be processed lawfully, fairly and in a transparent manner*
We believe releasing the requested information into the public domain would be unfair and cause damage and distress to the individuals in this case; all individuals involved in criminal prosecutions and non-senior employees of the CPS have a clear and strong expectation that their personal data will be held in confidence and not disclosed to the public under the FOI Act. This is especially true of sensitive personal data as it comprises information that individuals will regard as the most private.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0404-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1514,
"total-output-tokens": 259,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1094,
1
]
]
} |
bdbcd50845d165751ac57b81cfb112b907b555d1 | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
Information regarding the prosecution of Mrs M Ecclestone for murder
Request
Request, numbered for ease of reference:
1. The total cost of the prosecution of MRS MAVIS ECCLESTON for the murder of her terminally ill husband.
2. Who gave the final decision to prosecute.
Response
In response to point one, generally, where a request is made regarding prosecution costs, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) will endeavour to provide counsel’s costs only.
This is because the CPS does not record time spent by internal lawyers, paralegals and administrative staff on a case by case basis. We can therefore only provide counsel costs regarding the prosecution referred to in part one of your request.
CPS West Midlands confirm that the total recorded prosecution costs were £38,567.10.
In response to point two, the name of the Prosecutor who made the decision to charge in the matter referred to is withheld, under section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act – Personal Information. For a more detailed explanation of this exemption please see the attached section 17 refusal notice.
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0405-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1653,
"total-output-tokens": 315,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1191,
1
]
]
} |
abd9df6e7d1b3f3a79a5f7ca34135c350b4e638f | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
Request for information on any legal action the CPS has had against social media companies in the last five years
Request
1. Please state the number of occasions in each of the last five calendar years, and the current calendar year to date, that the CPS has taken legal action against any of the following social media companies:
a) Facebook b) Twitter c) Linkedin d) Snap e) Tik Tok f) Tinder g) Hinge h) Bumble
In the U.S to access documents held by the companies.
2. Please provide the U.S case reference code for each case
3. Please state the amount spent in legal fees in each of these cases
4. Please state the outcome of these cases. You clarified that legal action taken: this would be any legal cases against these firms in the U.S to force disclosure of documents, which the CPS wants to access to build a case for a prosecution for example.
Response
Having conducted a search with CPS Performance Management Unit, CPS International Justice Organised Crime Division and CPS Proceeds of Crime, we can confirm we hold no information within the scope of your request.
You may wish to contact the following departments who may be able to assist you with your request:
Police - https://www.met.police.uk/foi-ai/accessing-information/
HM Revenue & Customs- foi.request@hmrc.gov.uk
Department for Work and Pensions - freedom-of-information-request@dwp.gov.uk
National Crime Agency - communication@nca.gov.uk
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0406-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 2889,
"total-output-tokens": 433,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
690,
1
],
[
690,
1524,
2
]
]
} |
933ebec0a336c1eb8c0857609a0ba097ca933490 | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
How the CPS resources non-permanent staff
Request
I am writing to you under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 to please request the following information:
1. How you resource non-permanent staff i.e. Contractors, Consultants, Agency staff
2. A list of frameworks used to secure these resources
Response
The recruitment of non-permanent staff by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) is primarily undertaken via the Crown Commercial Services framework agreement reference RM3749 – ‘Public Sector Resourcing’.
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0407-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1462,
"total-output-tokens": 185,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
611,
1
]
]
} |
097a61ac44d37a248ab360b5ce3177402663dc8a | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
The number of offences charged by the way of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 between November 2019 and June 2019
Request
The number of offences charged by way of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 as amended by the Assaults on Emergency Workers Act 2018 from when it came into force (Nov 2018) to the end of June 2019.
Response
Please see the attached table from November 2018 to end of June 2019 (this data should be read in conjunction with the caveats appended to the table).
Please note the data does not cover more serious assaults on emergency workers which may have been charged under the Offences against the Person Act 1861.
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0408-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1518,
"total-output-tokens": 242,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
730,
1
]
]
} |
c78883eb27450e1b8b7ef6f02f8ca4877d23a89a | Section 17 Notice under the Freedom of Information Act 2000
WITHHOLDING INFORMATION
Section 31(1)(c) – Information which is not exempt information by virtue of section 30 is exempt information if its disclosure under this Act would, or would be likely to, prejudice the administration of justice
This is a qualified exemption which means that the decision to disclose the requested material is subject to the public interest test.
It may assist you to understand the decision if the public interest factors taken into account in this case is explained:
Public interest factors for disclosure:
• There is a strong public interest in the transparency and accountability of the spending of public money.
• Transparency increases public confidence in the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and the wider Criminal Justice System.
• To increase public understanding of the CPS decision making and prosecuting process
Public interest factors against disclosure:
• To disclose information relating to the investigatory approach by the police and engagement with the CPS would be likely to prejudice the decision making processes involved in particular criminal proceedings. The decision making processes are necessary for the administration of justice.
• There is a profound public interest in defendant/s receiving a fair hearing.
The profound public interest in ensuring the defendant/s receive a fair hearing means the overall balance of the public interest falls in favour of withholding the information.
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0409-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1536,
"total-output-tokens": 323,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1509,
1
]
]
} |
b8c659c630315f1011200bc6de08209245cda748 | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
What the CPS’s policies and protocols are when considering whether a current or former member of the government’s cabinet is to be prosecuted
Request
1. I am interested to know what are the CPS’s policies and applicable protocols when considering whether a current or former member of the government’s cabinet is to be prosecuted.
2. In such politically sensitive and, probably, very contentious cases, how is ‘the public interest’ defined? Do you have a Code for Crown Prosecutors that specifically applies when considering such prosecutions?
Response
The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) holds a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) setting out the principles of liaison between the CPS and the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) in respect of allegations including, but not limited to, the Westminster environment. This document is withheld under section 31 of the Freedom of Information Act – Law enforcement. For an explanation of this exemption please see the attached section 17 notice.
The Code for Crown Prosecutors gives guidance on the general principles to be applied when deciding whether or not a suspect should be charged with a criminal offence and when making ancillary decisions, such as whether to offer the suspect an out of court disposal. The Code is used when making decisions on all potential charges against all suspects. It therefore applies to any decision that may be made in respect of a current or former member of the Cabinet.
The Code is periodically revised so that it reflects legal and social developments, as well as changes in prosecution policy and practice. The latest edition of the Code, the eighth, was published in October 2018 and can be accessed on our website. For ease of access, I have provided a link here. Under section 16 we have an obligation to advise what, if any, information may assist you with your request. Beneath the Code for Crown Prosecutors sits a body of legal guidance and policies, which provide further detailed assistance to prosecutors on specific offences and topics.
Guidance, in relation to specific offences may be relevant to such decisions, depending on the nature of the allegation. For instance, we have guidance on Misconduct in a Public Office, which can be accessed on our website. For ease of access, I have provided a link to this guidance here, and a link to the legal guidance section of the CPS website here.
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0410-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 2,
"total-input-tokens": 3135,
"total-output-tokens": 585,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1799,
1
],
[
1799,
2495,
2
]
]
} |
cc97f34c7df1c95e1284e92d0e06136ddd3e9d2e | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
Information regarding Corporate Manslaughter Laws
Request
I would be very grateful if you could provide me with the following:
1. The number of charges brought for corporate manslaughter each year since the introduction of the Act.
2. The names of all organisations charged with corporate manslaughter.
3. Whether charges were also brought under Health and Safety legislation against any of the organisations. If charges were initially brought and then dropped, please confirm this if possible.
4. Whether charges were also brought against directors or employees of the organisation(s) under either health and safety, fire safety or food safety legislation or for common law manslaughter. If charges were initially brought and then dropped, please confirm this if possible.
5. The date of the offence
6. The outcome of the cases (and the year of the outcome).
7. The sentences in the successful prosecutions.
8. Confirmation of director disqualifications arising out of those prosecutions.
9. Whether those cases involved the HSE or the Local Authority as an enforcement authority.
I would be grateful if you could also provide the following:
1. The number of charges brought for common law manslaughter (gross negligence manslaughter, if you can be that specific) each year since 2000.
2. Whether there were related charges under Health and Safety, Food Safety or Fire Safety legislation against any of the defendants. If charges were initially brought and then dropped, please confirm this if possible.
3. Whether there were related charges under Health and Safety, Food Safety or Fire Safety legislation against any related organisations (and identifying them). If charges were initially brought and then dropped, please confirm this if possible.
4. The date of the offence
5. The outcome of the cases (and the year of the outcome).
6. The sentences in the successful prosecutions.
7. Confirmation of director disqualifications arising out of those prosecutions.
8. Whether those cases involved the HSE or the Local Authority as an enforcement authority.
You were referred to our published information (release 9 dated 29/02/19) regarding the Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 via the following link:
https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/freedom-information-releases-2019
On the 10 October 2019 you requested the following:
Response
1. Are you able to provide the additional information for the period after February 2019?
The table provided to you within the published data, dated 04 February 2019, has been updated in respect of one organisation as provided below:
| Name of organisation | H & S charges brought against the organisation? (Y/N) | Charges brought against Directors or employees of the organisation under either health and safety (H&S) legislation or for common law manslaughter (GNM) | Outcome of the case and year of outcome | Sentence in successful outcome | |-----------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|----------------------------------| | JTF Wholesale | Y | H&S | Guilty plea | Fined - £1m |
2. Also, can you provide the information sought by questions:
- 3 and 4 (as they relate to fire or food safety):
- 8; and
- 9.
For ease of reference I have copied questions three, four eight and nine from both categories of questions below and have renumbered them 1 - 5:
1. Whether charges were also brought under Health and Safety legislation against any of the organisations. If charges were initially brought and then dropped, please confirm this if possible.
2. Whether charges were also brought against directors or employees of the organisation(s) under either, health and safety, fire safety or food safety legislation or for common law manslaughter. If charges were initially brought and then dropped, please confirm this if possible. The table previously provided to you within the published data (https://www.cps.gov.uk/publication/freedom-information-releases-2019) shows the charges brought against Directors or employees of the organisations under health and safety (H&S) legislation or for common law manslaughter (GNM).
We do not collate information related to specific fire safety or food safety legislation; in these types of cases any such breaches would be likely to be dealt with under Health and Safety legislation.
3. **Confirmation of director disqualifications arising out of those prosecutions**
The CPS does not hold this information.
4. **Whether those cases involved the HSE or the Local Authority as an enforcement authority.**
The CPS does not hold this information.
5. **Also, can I assume you’ll still be dealing with the manslaughter information request?**
In response to point one in the second category of questions you requested “The number of charges brought for common law manslaughter each year since 2000” The CPS does hold recorded information relating to the number of relevant charges from financial year 2004-05. This data is shown below and should be read in conjunction with the caveat appended to it\*
| Year | Number of charges | |------------|-------------------| | 2004-2005 | 104 | | 2005-2006 | 131 | | 2006-2007 | 120 | | 2007-2008 | 128 | | 2008-2009 | 139 | | 2009-2010 | 106 | | 2010-2011 | 102 | | 2011-2012 | 71 | | 2012-2013 | 121 | | 2013-2014 | 108 | | 2014-2015 | 90 | | 2015-2016 | 104 | | 2016-2017 | 106 | | 2017-2018 | 104 | | 2018-2019 | 132 |
\*This data have been drawn from the CPS’s administrative IT system, which (as with any large scale recording system) is subject to possible errors with data entry and processing. The figures are provisional and subject to change as more information is recorded by the CPS. The data relates to the number of offences recorded in magistrates’ courts, in which a prosecution commenced. There is no indication of final outcome or if the charged offence was the substantive charge at finalisation. The official statistics relating to crime and policing are maintained by the Home Office (HO) and the official statistics relating to sentencing, criminal court proceedings, offenders brought to justice, the courts and the judiciary are maintained by the Ministry of Justice (MOJ).
In order to respond to questions two to eight asked in the category relating to common law manslaughter a manual examination of all cases would be required. As an indication of the work this would involve records indicate that there were a total of 1,666 charges brought for common law manslaughter since financial years 2004-05 to 2018-19.
Section 12(1) of the FOI Act means public authorities are not obliged to comply with a request for information if it estimates the cost of complying would exceed the appropriate limit. The appropriate limit for central government it is set at £600. This represents the estimated cost of one person spending 3.5 working days determining whether the department holds the information, and locating, retrieving and extracting the information.
We believe that the cost of reviewing cases involving 1, 166 charges as described, would exceed the appropriate limit. Consequently, we are not obliged to comply with your request.
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0411-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 4,
"total-input-tokens": 7614,
"total-output-tokens": 1929,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1931,
1
],
[
1931,
4180,
2
],
[
4180,
6541,
3
],
[
6541,
7785,
4
]
]
} |
2e0362aa280883b91d9266c08e2dd47911b6c0d0 | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
For years 2016, 2017 and 2018 for each police force in England and Wales provide the number of prosecutions that were dropped or discontinued and the reason for the course of action. This should involve cases that the defendant submitted a not guilty plea at a preliminary hearing.
Request
For years 2016, 2017 and 2018 for each police force in England and Wales provide the number of prosecutions that were dropped or discontinued and the reason for the course of action. For the avoidance of doubt, this should involve cases that the defendant submitted a not guilty plea at a preliminary hearing but for whatever reason, the case against the defendant was stopped BEFORE any judicial determination on his or her guilt.
Response
Please see the attached table which provides the number of prosecutions dropped and the principal reason allocated to that outcome. The table is disaggregated by the 42 police force areas. Please note our records do not provide any indication of the hearing at which a not guilty plea was entered. This data should be read in conjunction with the caveats appended to the table.
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0899 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0412-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1625,
"total-output-tokens": 306,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1211,
1
]
]
} |
18f8689e9b855d76deb60f9159394f83af0480e7 | Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
Information in relation to the costs and work completed on the case of Paul Gascoigne over claims of a sexual assault in 2018
Request
1. Please provide a breakdown of all known costs to the CPS of the prosecution of Paul Gascoigne over claims of sexual assault on a train in 2018;
2. Please disclose the known number of hours logged by staff working on the case, with a breakdown showing what their roles were.
Response
In response to point one, generally, where a request is made regarding prosecution costs, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) will endeavour to provide counsel’s costs only. CPS West Midlands confirm that costs of £9,288.00 are recorded against one named QC and costs of £188.00 are recorded against another named QC.
The CPS does not record time spent by internal lawyers, paralegals and administrative staff on a case by case basis. Staff hours are therefore not recorded as described in point two. It is on this basis therefore that we are only able to provide counsel’s costs.
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0413-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1644,
"total-output-tokens": 304,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
1105,
1
]
]
} |
93737b90de00aad31bcd1fe64ab2cec159993068 | Disclosure ref: 61 Sent: 18th November 2019
Freedom of Information Act 2000 Request
Breakdown of costs regarding the Julian Assange cases
Request
Please disclose all known costs to the CPS of the Julian Assange cases, with a breakdown showing which cases/hearings the costs they relate to
Response
Generally, where a request is made regarding prosecution costs, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) will endeavour to provide counsel’s costs only. This is because the CPS does not record time spent by internal lawyers, paralegals and administrative staff on a case by case basis.
To date this is £59,073.99. The breakdown of this amount is detailed below:
Counsel Fees: Hearings in relation to European Arrest Warrant and Breach of Bail.
Total Amount: £54,915.99
Counsel Fees: Hearings in relation to Extradition request from the USA
Total Amount: £4,185.00
Information Management Unit 020 3357 0788 IMU@cps.gov.uk
| olmocr | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | 2025-03-31T00:00:00 | {
"Source-File": "/workspace/input-pdfs/0414-pdf.pdf",
"olmocr-version": "0.1.60",
"pdf-total-pages": 1,
"total-input-tokens": 1563,
"total-output-tokens": 289,
"total-fallback-pages": 0
} | {
"pdf_page_numbers": [
[
0,
925,
1
]
]
} |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.